Has Digital Media made the world a more democratic place?

This is a very common case study question. It could also come up in Section A as the impact of digital media is a very relevant issue in Media Studies.

You have one hour for the case study question of the exam so it's worth spending some time planning. I would start by thinking of 4-5 general points. They need to address the debate in  the question - ways in which digital media is more democratic and ways in which democracy is restricted.

To get a good mark you need to illustrate these general points with more specific examples. Your examples should provide a sense of a case study, of a particular area that you've looked at in more detail. My examples are more wide-ranging (because I want you to widen your knowledge!).

Then you need to start linking in your media debates, issues and theories. If you do this at the planning stage you know you won't forget to include them.

Now you're ready to start writing your answer. Don't worry about a long introduction, just state what your case study is and what you're going to argue. Remember to keep relating you points back to the question and the debate within it. Theory doesn't have to be applied in a clunky way - you don't need to say 'Marxist' to show that you're applying Marxism, just use the vocabulary of Marxist theory.

So, has digital media made our society more democratic? The best way to start is to think about the media we had before Web 2.0 made the internet accessible, cheap and interactive. We have always had newspapers, but they aren't the most democratic form of media, because...

• They are self-regulated and allow for political bias (unlike TV and radio). The Sun newspaper made it very obvious during the last election campaign that they were supporting Cameron. Papers like The Mail and The Express tend to promote more right-wing views. Whilst the Guardian claims to be impartial its representation of events tends to be more liberal and left-wing.
• The ownership of newspapers can lead to political bias, as the recent Leveson enquiry revealed. The close relationship between Cameron and Rebecca Brooks/Rupert Murdoch was exposed.
• Newspapers offer limited opportunities for audience members to comment. The views expressed are those of journalists and those views are edited by editors, who are politically biased (see above points).
• The content of a newspaper is limited by the number of pages, something which is not a restriction online. Therefore the stories presented to us have to be prioritised according to the paper's news agenda and news values. So the audience only get a version of news which the editor wants them to see.

None of these factors make for a particularly democratic media. Broadcast media claims to be impartial, and according to the OFCOM code it has to be. 

However the above diagram, which you've seen before, shows that audiences don't necessarily perceive it that way.

So, the utopian view of digital media is that it breaks down all of these barriers to democracy. The internet creates media plurality by allowing a range of views to be presented. Rather than the audience being passive absorbers of messages, they can actively contribute and access a range of views. There are no barriers to presenting these views because anyone can blog, Tweet or get involved in a discussion forum. We can easily read the same story in three different newspapers without needing to go and buy paper copies. Moreover, we can read alternative versions of the story which do not come from politically biased sources. 

You need to learn a list of all these advantages and make sure you can mention specific examples.

• During the Iran elections, there was a 'Twitter Revolution' where social media was used to report from within the country. Shocking videos and images were posted. Traditional media would not have made this possible. Read more about it here http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8505645.stm
• Minority groups who struggle to have views represented in traditional media can find a voice because the 'gatekeeper' has been removed.
• Audiences can even choose which adverts to watch and ignore rather than being brainwashed.
• Images which the press would previously have censored can be accessed. For example, the images of Prince Harry in Las Vegas were available online while the press (initially, until The Sun changed their minds) refused to print them.
• It is free to upload images, videos or text to the internet and they reach large audiences. Google+ reached an audience of 50 million in a year, it took radio over 30 years to do the same. The audiences who engage with social media tend to be young and active.
• It enables audiences to prevent rich, privileged people from protecting their privacy with expensive superinjunctions. No amount of money could stop Ryan Giggs from being named on Twitter.
• It allows people to share information about political campaigns, like the Equal love Equal rights campaign to legalise gay marriage in the US https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR9gyloyOjM or the Kony 2012 campaign  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4MnpzG5Sqc (just look at the number of views!)

However, this utopian view of the internet can be misleading. You have to be able to argue the other side of the debate.

• The internet cannot bring true democracy in authoritarian states where social media is blocked and the internet is used for Propaganda. Some critics believe that the Twitter revolution in Iran was over-hyped by Western media http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/09/iran-twitter-revolution-protests
• Turkey censors sites which in any way attack the founder of modern Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. They demanded that Google blocked youtube videos breaking this rule in all countries (Google refused, but YouTube was completely blocked in Turkey.
• In Russia, bloggers are rumoured to be paid to spread propaganda.
• Even in this country, the political views shared on Facebook can be misguided and based on the moral panics created by newspapers. This slightly random forum has lots of examples of internet gullibility http://www.thefootballramble.com/forum/viewthread/7257
• Kony 2012 turned out not to be all it seemed, and the word 'slacktivism' developed to describe the way in which people think they are helping a cause by hitting 'share' or 'like'. Very relevant article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/evan-bailyn/kony-2012-activism_b_1361791.html
• Google and Facebook are increasingly shaping the content we get from newsfeeds and searches, so that what we think is impartial information is actually now subject to gatekeepers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAMP1Wu_M2U
• The internet provides anonymity for people who want to troll and bully, meaning that we may not feel free to express ourselves.
• Increasing regulation and control means that freedom of speech online could be under threat. You need to know what SOPA and PIPA are, this video will help http://www.fightforthefuture.org/pipa/
• Hefty sentences have also been handed out to people who organise riots or Tweet abuse. You might feel that this is justified but you need to consider how the delicate issue of privacy/freedom of speech will be affected, and how police decide what is 'abuse' and what is simple expression of a view. Exmaples here http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/16/facebook-riot-calls-men-jailed  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19059127    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/may/22/muamba-twitter-abuse-student-sorry

So, the answer to the question is that yes, digital media has made the world more democratic, but there are lots of 'buts' which make the statement in the question too simplistic. You all need to learn all of this!

Facebook and Audience Theory

Can the Uses and Gratifications Theory and Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs explain the popularity of Facebook?

"Sue is reading a book ... Sue thinks it's time for a cup of coffee! ... Sue can't wait to watch Lost! ... Sue WOULD REALLY LIKE SOME ATTENTION, EVERYONE."

Is the Facebook status update merely a way of seeking attention? It’s true that there aren’t many other ways of getting 500+ ‘friends’ to hear what you have to say at once, but which other needs does the social networking site gratify? If Facebook was a country, it would have a greater population than the United States ; in fact it would be the third most populated country in the world. So can audience theories be used to explain its appeal?

You all shared some Facebook statuses in class and they reveal a lot about how the site fulfils some of your needs. One thing worth considering, though, is whether you edited the statuses in any way before sharing them. Did you pick your most recents statuses or did you reject some because you didn’t want to share them? If you’re happy to share your status with hundreds of friends online, why would you be apprehensive about sharing it with your teacher and classmates?

The answer may be that we see our Facebook ‘self’ as a different version of the ‘real self’. The person represented by your Facebook profile page isn’t, in the truest sense, ‘you’. In some ways it might be the person you want to be, a slightly improved version of you who looks good in every photo (thanks to the ‘de-tag’ button) and has loads of mates. This is complicated further by Facebook’s new privacy settings, which allow different lists of friends to see different things. So a user can hide that photo of themselves drunk at the England cricket match while they were supposed to be off sick from their boss. It is possible to create slightly different Facebook versions of yourself for different audiences to view. This is another point to consider. Facebook may have a 500 million-strong audience of users, but this audience is fragmented down into millions of smaller audiences, every one of them unique. Your Facebook ‘audience’ are the people who read your updates and look at your photos. You know what your audience want and you try to give it to them. We need to think not just about how updating a status will fulfil some of your own needs but also how it provides gratification for others.

Let’s look at the FB statuses you did want to share:

1. The ‘share some exciting news’ status

JUST GOT A BABY BUNNY RABBIT!!!!

Just saw police shooting tear gas at rioters!

Maybe the trend for updating people on what you’re doing comes from the old ‘XX is’… prefix which FB statuses used to have. These statuses satisfy your audience’s need for surveillance. Generally the news that we post needs to be exciting and not mundane – ‘just defrosted my freezer’ doesn’t have quite the same effect. Though that doesn’t seem to stop some people posting such drivel….

2. The ‘amuse my friends’ status

Taught my rabbit to climb the stairs J

All this room and the cat still lies in the middle of the bed! :\

Laughing at the trolley rage in Asda

Often people feel the need to write a status that’s funny. If your status gets a good reaction (some lols and likes) you will feel a sense of belonging (see Maslow) but you will also be providing diversion for your audience. Nobody needs to know about the stair-climbing bunny, but it makes us smile on a dull September afternoon. If the user then uploads a video of said bunny rabbit climbing the stairs, most of their friends will probably be happy to waste a good 5 minutes watching and commenting on it. It’s much more exciting than writing that psychology essay you were supposed to have finished an hour ago….

3. The ‘it’s a private joke’ status

Woke up today with a massive beard! Jackson, Owen I hope your happy

Mentioning your friends in a status shows that you’re using Facebook to build personal relationships. It also creates a sense of belonging - for Jackson and Owen at least - but it may exclude others who don’t know what the heck you’re on about. Maybe that’s the point? Also the status is a little bit vague – I’m imagining someone waking up with a big comedy stuck on beard attached to their chin – so people will ask questions and interaction will come about as a result.

4. The ‘song lyrics’ status

I got the moves like Jagger

This one’s quite tricky. Facebook asks ‘what’s on your mind?’ Do we take this a little too literally when we respond with the lyrics from the song that’s been stuck in our heads all day? Do we choose song lyrics to suit our mood or that we identify with? Are we simply ‘showing off’ the fact that we’re up to date with music?

5. The ‘rant’

Blackberries are pooey

I can’t help but wonder if the original word used was ‘pooey’ or something stronger? We often use FB to complain. Personal identity could come in here. FB provides a forum for us to compare our problems with others. If someone responds with a comment to support our rant, we feel better because someone has identified with us. This could work with something quite trivial, like your frustration at your mobile phone, or something more emotional, like a rant at your ex. When someone else comments that yes, he’s a complete !@*? you will feel better.

6. The ‘my life’s better than yours’ status

I feel sorry for people at Emmanuel

This is evidence of personal identity. This person may also have posted updates about how much fun they’re currently having. They are comparing their situation with that of others, and their audience will do the same when they read the update. This type of status can boost your self esteem, if what you post is true.

7. The ‘commenting on what you’ve just seen on TV’ status

HaHaHa Arsenal are rubbish

Ever checked your FB newsfeed when X factor is on? There’s always bound to be someone who makes a comment on how rubbish that last singer was or how fit Gary Barlow looks today. We often use the TV to stimulate conversation in our own living rooms, but FB now allows us to take that conversation to a new level and share it with hundreds. It’s instant – you don’t even have to wait until school on Monday to discuss it. Many statuses will relate to other things happening on other media platforms. It’s personal relationships again. No doubt many angry Arsenal fans will have commented on this one. The status won’t update its audience on anything they didn’t know, it’s purely to provoke a little conversation or, as boys like to call it ‘banter.’

So there you have it. Do the other statuses you wrote down fit with these groupings?