scholarly journals Commodification, Spatialization, and Structuring in Instagram (Vincent Mosco's Descriptive Political Economy Study on Instagram Anies Baswedan Related to Covid-19)

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rifka Hanifah ◽  
Vinda Fauzia Hamdani Putri ◽  
Ajeng Setia Utari
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
New Media ◽  
Descriptive Study ◽  
The United States ◽  
Internet Technology ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Economy Of Media ◽  
Exchange Value ◽  
Use Values

Instagram is one of the social media that is widely used by Indonesians. Instagram users in Indonesia are under Instagram users from the United States, Brazil and China. The emergence of social media Instagram is a new and interesting dynamic to research based on Vincent Mosco's descriptive study of the political economy of the economy. One way to see and analyze an issue or phenomenon of communication is through the descriptive study of Vincent Mosco's political economy and economy. In theory, Mosco refers to the globalization of the political economy of media which explains where there is a transition from old media and when new media emerge. Thus the formulation of the problem of this research is how the political economy practice of communication in the use of Instagram social media during the Covid-19 pandemic which was observed from Anies Baswedan's Instagram account. This study uses a descriptive research method in order to provide an overview description of the political economy practice of communication on Instagram social media during the Covid-19 pandemic which was observed from the Instagram account of the Governor of DKI Jakarta, Anies Baswedan. It can be concluded that social media is a means based on internet technology (online media) such as Instagram which allows a person to interact, communicate, collaborate and share information with others. Even Instagram users can easily participate directly in it. Commodification, spatialization and structuration are three important elements in political economy because they can bring about changes in function or use values. Commodification is one of the elements that is directly related to how the process of transforming goods or services (along with their use value) into a commodity that has an exchange value in the market. Spatialization is a process when dealing with time and space. Structuring is a communication or media activity associated with social structures.

scholarly journals The Political Economy of Working-Class Social Media Commerce: Digital Capitalism and the Engelsian Concept of Working-Class “Property”

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 171-194
Author(s):  
Suddhabrata Deb Roy
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
Working Class ◽  
The Political ◽  
Digital Capitalism ◽  
Exchange Value ◽  
Estate Property ◽  
Social Media Platforms ◽  
University Town ◽  
The University

Social Media platforms, from being simply a mode of communication, have, recently, evolved into digital “marketplaces”, which have been facilitating the exchange of commodities within the working-class. In addition to the digitalisation of the medium of exchange value creation, which gives the worker a certain amount of regulated autonomy, this has also reinvigorated the debate about owning property and its utilisation for credit and profit generation by the working-class. The term, ‘Property’ in the paper, is not restricted to only real estate property but encompasses everything which has the potential to generate an exchange value for its owner. The paper generalises Engels’s ideas about property owned by the workers from two of his major works, “The Housing Question” and “The Condition of the Working-Class in England” and uses the same to analyse the political economy and growing popularity of social media- based commerce among the working-class. Through data collected from the university town of Dunedin in Aotearoa New Zealand, a town with an extensive and established system of social media-based commerce, the paper puts forward the relevance of the Engelsian critique of the idea of uplifting the working-class simply by giving them control over the possession of property, in the age of digital capitalism. In doing so, the present paper talks about how digital capitalism utilises social media and its associated platforms for commercial exchange to keep the cycle of accumulation in the capitalist social system intact by further exploiting the working-class.

scholarly journals Commodification via the New Media: Content, Audience, and Labour in GoJek’s GoFood service

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kun Muhammad Adi ◽  
Anang Sujoko ◽  
Antoni Antoni
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
New Media ◽  
Qualitative Approach ◽  
Internet Technology ◽  
The Political ◽  
Media Content ◽  
Purposive Sampling ◽  
Life Patterns ◽  
The Media

The existence of new media makes humans have control over the media they consume only through a smartphone on their hands. GoJek contributes new dynamics because the use of new media in the form of an application has changed most of the life patterns of media behavior. In the context of new media, media behavior is inseparable from the concept of political economy communication. This research uses a qualitative approach by extracting information from users, merchants, and drivers on GoFood service features taken by purposive sampling. The collected data from the result of observations, interviews, and documentation will be associated and analyzed using the political economy communication concept of Vincent Mosco, especially the commodification. Researchers found that the aspects of the commodification of content, commodification of audience, and commodification of labor of GoFood service features resulted in changes in society in adapting internet technology which also affected the welfare of the Indonesian economy.Keywords: GoFood, commodification, political economy of communication, and new media

scholarly journals Facetten der Debatte über das digitale Arbeiten

2017 ◽  
Vol 47 (186) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Sevignani
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
New Media ◽  
Digital Communication ◽  
The Political ◽  
Peer Production ◽  
Commodity Production ◽  
Informational Capitalism ◽  
Production Of Culture ◽  
Use Of Social Media

This article introduces the reader to the so called ‘digital labor debate’ in the context of the political economy of (new) media and (digital) communication. The political economy of social media is best qualified as surveillance-driven production of culture and as an interplay between distinct modes of production (commons based peer production and commodity production). The latter gives rise to the problem of how to understand the interplay between these modes. The article discusses contributions from different theoretical angels, such as the materialist theory of communication, the theory of cognitive capitalism, the theory of prosumption, and the theory of rent in the informational age. The discussion is organized by three topics: Does the use of social media qualify as work? Are users subsumed to capital control? Are users exploited? The article marks theoretical challenges for a critical theory of informational capitalism.

Branding Internet sovereignty: Digital media and the Chinese–Russian cyberalliance

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 594-613 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stanislav Budnitsky ◽  
Lianrui Jia
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
Digital Media ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nation Branding ◽  
Internet Technology ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Internet Governance ◽  
National Brands

In the 2000s, China and Russia emerged as outspoken actors with global ambitions. To communicate their status aspirations, both countries introduced a range of nation-branding institutions and initiatives. Global Internet governance – the design and administration of Internet technology and related policymaking – is among the domains where China and Russia have asserted their national brands. The Chinese and Russian governments co-advance the brand narrative of ‘Internet sovereignty’ in opposition to perceived technological and governance hegemony of the United States. Given the power that private online intermediaries wield in the political economy of the Internet, national digital media champions, China’s Baidu and Russia’s Yandex, have been integral to their countries’ Internet branding efforts. The article examines how China and Russia have forged a public–private relationship with respective digital media champions in the context of building and branding an Internet sovereignty agenda.

Menelaah Lebih Dekat “Post Factual/Post Truth Politics, Studi Kasus Brexit” (Analsis Resensi Media)

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eko Wahyono ◽  
Rizka Amalia ◽  
Ikma Citra Ranteallo
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Mass Media ◽  
New Media ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Struggle ◽  
The Real ◽  
The Mass Media ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Way

This research further examines the video entitled “what is the truth about post-factual politics?” about the case in the United States related to Trump and in the UK related to Brexit. The phenomenon of Post truth/post factual also occurs in Indonesia as seen in the political struggle experienced by Ahok in the governor election (DKI Jakarta). Through Michel Foucault's approach to post truth with assertive logic, the mass media is constructed for the interested parties and ignores the real reality. The conclusion of this study indicates that new media was able to spread various discourses ranging from influencing the way of thoughts, behavior of society to the ideology adopted by a society.Keywords: Post factual, post truth, new media

Class Politics, American-Style

2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 659-662 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Waddell
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
Middle Class ◽  
Political Science ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Rich ◽  
State Of Affairs ◽  
Winner Take All ◽  
Take All

Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson's Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer—And Turned Its Back on the Middle Class is both a work of political science and a contribution to broad public discussion of distributive politics. Its topic could not be more relevant to a US polity wracked by bitter partisan disagreements about taxes, social spending, financial regulation, social insecurity, and inequality. The political power of “the rich” is a theme of widespread public attention. The headline on the cover of the January–February 2011 issue of The American Interest—“Inequality and Democracy: Are Plutocrats Drowning Our Republic?”—is indicative. Francis Fukuyama's lead essay, entitled “Left Out,” clarifies that by “plutocracy,” the journal means “not just rule by the rich, but rule by and for the rich. We mean, in other words, a state of affairs in which the rich influence government in such a way as to protect and expand their own wealth and influence, often at the expense of others.” Fukuyama makes clear that he believes that this state of affairs obtains in the United States today.Readers of Perspectives on Politics will know that the topic has garnered increasing attention from political scientists in general and in our journal in particular. In March 2009, we featured a symposium on Larry Bartels's Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. And in December 2009, our lead article, by Jeffrey A. Winters and Benjamin I. Page, starkly posed the question “Oligarchy in the United States?” and answered it with an equally stark “yes.” Winner-Take-All Politics thus engages a broader scholarly discussion within US political science, at the same time that it both draws upon and echoes many “classic themes” of US political science from the work of Charles Beard and E. E. Schattschneider to Ted Lowi and Charles Lindblom.In this symposium, we have brought together a group of important scholars and commentators who offer a range of perspectives on the book and on the broader themes it engages. While most of our discussants are specialists on “American politics,” we have also sought out scholars beyond this subfield. Our charge to the discussants is to evaluate the book's central claims and evidence, with a focus on three related questions: 1) How compelling is its analysis of the “how” and “why” of recent US public policy and its “turn” in favor of “the rich” and against “the middle class”? 2) How compelling is its critique of the subfield of “American politics” for its focus on the voter–politician linkage and on “politics as spectacle” at the expense of an analysis of “politics as organized combat”? 3) And do you agree with its argument that recent changes in US politics necessitate a different, more comparative, and more political economy–centered approach to the study of US politics?—Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor

Book Reviews

2015 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 365-367
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
Exchange Rates ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Currency Crises ◽  
The United States ◽  
Exchange Rate Policy ◽  
Monetary Integration ◽  
The Political ◽  
Currency Policy

Benjamin J. Cohen of University of California, Santa Barbara reviews “Currency Politics: The Political Economy of Exchange Rate Policy”, by Jeffry A. Frieden. The Econlit abstract of this book begins: “Analyzes the politics surrounding exchange rates, including the influence of industries on the political process. Discusses the political economy of currency choice; a theory of currency policy preferences; the United States─from greenbacks to gold, 1862-79; the United States─silver threats among the gold, 1880-96; European monetary integration─from Bretton Woods to the euro and beyond; Latin American currency policy, 1970-2010; the political economy of Latin American currency crises; and the politics of exchange rates─implications and extensions.” Frieden is Professor of Government at Harvard University.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document