Content Form:APRJA 13 Edoardo Biscossi - Revision history

Geoffcox: /* Works cited */

2024-11-11T17:34:15Z

Works cited

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:34, 11 November 2024
Line 120:		Line 120:
	Avanessian, Armen, and Suhail Malik. ''The Time Complex: Post-Contemporary.'' Jan. 2016. www.academia.edu, https://www.academia.edu/100503758/The_Time_Complex_Post_Contemporary.		Avanessian, Armen, and Suhail Malik. ''The Time Complex: Post-Contemporary.'' Jan. 2016. www.academia.edu, https://www.academia.edu/100503758/The_Time_Complex_Post_Contemporary.

	Baudrillard, Jean. ''In the Shadow of the Silent Majorities, or the End of the Social.'' A K Press ~~Distribution~~, 1994.		Baudrillard, Jean. ''In the Shadow of the Silent Majorities, or the End of the Social.'' A K Press, 1994.

	Berardi, Franco Bifo, et al. ''After the Future.'' A K Press ~~Distribution~~, 2011.		Berardi, Franco Bifo, et al. ''After the Future.'' A K Press, 2011.

	Birch, Kean, and Fabian Muniesa. ''Assetization: Turning Things into Assets in Technoscientific Capitalism.'' The MIT Press, 2020.		Birch, Kean, and Fabian Muniesa. ''Assetization: Turning Things into Assets in Technoscientific Capitalism.'' The MIT Press, 2020.

Geoffcox: /* Works cited */

2024-11-11T17:32:09Z

Works cited

Geoffcox at 17:26, 11 November 2024

2024-11-11T17:26:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:26, 11 November 2024
Line 42:		Line 42:
	== The Political Aesthetics of Content/Forms ==		== The Political Aesthetics of Content/Forms ==
	Under Big Tech’s corporate oligopoly, the production and circulation of content/forms across the social might appear firmly subjugated to algorithmic governmentality (Rouvroy and Berns). As suggested by many accounts of technological power, from Tiqqun to Bernard Stiegler, these conditions dramatically limit the space of political and aesthetic possibility.<ref>Even seeming irregularities fail to destabilise a system that is already predicated on constant crisis (Chun), error and instability (Majaca & Parisi), especially given the power of platforms control to modulate turbulence and “metabolise contingency into power itself” (Williams).</ref> We can find one of the most influential critiques of platform control in Shoshana Zuboff’s work on surveillance capitalism as a new regime of accumulation grounded on the extraction of “data exhaust” from social relations (Zuboff). In this critique, behavioural modification and commodification are fundamental to accumulation and power. Surveillance ubiquitously records, predicts and steers everyday practices in a way that surpasses the anticipatory conformity of panoptical surveillance, where subjects chose submission by fear of compulsion. Under surveillance capitalism, “agency […] is gradually submerged into a new kind of automaticity – a lived experience of pure stimulus-response” and "conformity […] disappears into the mechanical order of things and bodies” (Zuboff 82). From this perspective, the social might appear inert and disempowered under the transcendental control of Big Tech.<ref>Such a scenario somewhat echoes Baudrillard’s famous thesis on “the end of the social”, whereby the emergence of informational media networks allows a neutralisation of the social as a political field, producing the “silent majorities” of mass culture as a mere “simulation of the social” (Baudrillard).</ref>		Under Big Tech’s corporate oligopoly, the production and circulation of content/forms across the social might appear firmly subjugated to algorithmic governmentality (Rouvroy and Berns). As suggested by many accounts of technological power, from Tiqqun to Bernard Stiegler, these conditions dramatically limit the space of political and aesthetic possibility.<ref>Even seeming irregularities fail to destabilise a system that is already predicated on constant crisis (Chun), error and instability (Majaca & Parisi), especially given the power of platforms control to modulate turbulence and “metabolise contingency into power itself” (Williams).</ref> We can find one of the most influential critiques of platform control in Shoshana Zuboff’s work on surveillance capitalism as a new regime of accumulation grounded on the extraction of “data exhaust” from social relations (Zuboff). In this critique, behavioural modification and commodification are fundamental to accumulation and power. Surveillance ubiquitously records, predicts and steers everyday practices in a way that surpasses the anticipatory conformity of panoptical surveillance, where subjects chose submission by fear of compulsion. Under surveillance capitalism, “agency […] is gradually submerged into a new kind of automaticity – a lived experience of pure stimulus-response” and "conformity […] disappears into the mechanical order of things and bodies” (Zuboff 82). From this perspective, the social might appear inert and disempowered under the transcendental control of Big Tech.<ref>Such a scenario somewhat echoes Baudrillard’s famous thesis on “the end of the social”, whereby the emergence of informational media networks allows a neutralisation of the social as a political field, producing the “silent majorities” of mass culture as a mere “simulation of the social” (Baudrillard).</ref>

			However, it’s worth questioning this perspective by looking at the current configurations of content and forms within the techno-social milieu. The proliferation of connected mobile devices and the low barriers to entry to the platform-ed internet have produced a multiplication of media objects and populations. The result is a global digital culture with intensive capacities for circulation, imitation and affective connection through networked computation.

			Despite the clear diversities of experience across the global lines of class and race — and keeping in mind that even basic internet access is not universally given — global media populations still disorderly imitate and contaminate each other’s aesthetic registers and performance grammars, through overlapping networks of social media, content platforms, private messaging, servers and group chats. The younger segments of the Western and Eastern middle classes share at least some of their memetic language with urban proletarians and migrants around the world. In January, a Yemenite Houti pirate attacking ships controlled by Israeli allies in the Suez canal, went viral after portraying himself using the same aesthetics as the average western teenager — the ultra-smooth cuteness of a TikTok filter — by which his
			image entered global cycles of cultural remix (Steinbuch & O’Neill). Cultural critics have recently observed how young women from the US and Israeli military, some even employed by US intelligence, circulate military propaganda on social media by following the same aesthetic grammars used by lifestyle influencers and “e-girls” (Yalcinkaya). Political forces — most prominently right wing nationalism, from the US to India — have successfully weaponised affective media networks for the purpose of spreading propaganda and inciting political violence.

	Thus, the platform milieu appears as a crucial site of aesthetic negotiation and power struggles. Ravi Sundaram sees the “new urban information ecology” as a “remarkable infrastructure of agility and possibility” with enough expressive and associative power to exceed complete capture by platform logic (6). It is precisely this tension between corporate calculation, affective coordination and aesthetic expression that produces the rhythm of techno-social life.<ref>According to Stamatia Portanova “the complexity of rhythm resides in the problematic coexistence between […] the regularity of measurement and the spontaneity of sensation, the abstraction of metrics and the experience of complexity” (“Whose Time Is It?” 44).</ref> Here, the techno-social body appears not so much as a homogenous “silent majority” (Baudrillard), but rather as a libidinal mesh of users’ desire and corporate interests, affects and computation, radically open to imitation and affective contagion. Collective intelligence and creativity never seem to realise any complete autonomy from control, and ''yet'' they are never fully subjugated to corporate accumulation.		Thus, the platform milieu appears as a crucial site of aesthetic negotiation and power struggles. Ravi Sundaram sees the “new urban information ecology” as a “remarkable infrastructure of agility and possibility” with enough expressive and associative power to exceed complete capture by platform logic (6). It is precisely this tension between corporate calculation, affective coordination and aesthetic expression that produces the rhythm of techno-social life.<ref>According to Stamatia Portanova “the complexity of rhythm resides in the problematic coexistence between […] the regularity of measurement and the spontaneity of sensation, the abstraction of metrics and the experience of complexity” (“Whose Time Is It?” 44).</ref> Here, the techno-social body appears not so much as a homogenous “silent majority” (Baudrillard), but rather as a libidinal mesh of users’ desire and corporate interests, affects and computation, radically open to imitation and affective contagion. Collective intelligence and creativity never seem to realise any complete autonomy from control, and ''yet'' they are never fully subjugated to corporate accumulation.

Geoffcox at 17:18, 11 November 2024

2024-11-11T17:18:13Z

Geoffcox at 17:09, 11 November 2024

2024-11-11T17:09:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:09, 11 November 2024
Line 4:		Line 4:

	= Platform Pragmatics =		= Platform Pragmatics =
	= Labour, Speculation and Self-reflexivity in ~~Technologically-mediated~~ Content Economies =		= Labour, Speculation and Self-reflexivity in Content Economies =

	== Abstract ==		== Abstract ==

Geoffcox at 21:38, 2 November 2024

2024-11-02T21:38:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:38, 2 November 2024
Line 4:		Line 4:

	= Platform Pragmatics =		= Platform Pragmatics =
	= Labour, Speculation and Self-reflexivity in Technologically ~~Mediated~~ Content Economies =		= Labour, Speculation and Self-reflexivity in Technologically-mediated Content Economies =

	== Abstract ==		== Abstract ==

Geoffcox at 21:37, 2 November 2024

2024-11-02T21:37:25Z

Show changes

Simoon at 11:06, 29 October 2024

2024-10-29T11:06:16Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:06, 29 October 2024
Line 96:		Line 96:

	Lastly, this framework points to the question of ''who'' the subject of contemporary technological ecosystems really is. I suggest that the speculative and self-reflexive character of platform pragmatics undermines the universality of the User as the received subject of media technologies — self-possessed Man, master of the instrument and transparent subject of volition. In contrast with this fantasy, the legible subject of platform pragmatics appears radically affectable, feminised and open to outer determination, troubling a cornerstone of the master discourse around humanity and technology, by being — at once — user and ''used''.		Lastly, this framework points to the question of ''who'' the subject of contemporary technological ecosystems really is. I suggest that the speculative and self-reflexive character of platform pragmatics undermines the universality of the User as the received subject of media technologies — self-possessed Man, master of the instrument and transparent subject of volition. In contrast with this fantasy, the legible subject of platform pragmatics appears radically affectable, feminised and open to outer determination, troubling a cornerstone of the master discourse around humanity and technology, by being — at once — user and ''used''.

			<div class="page-break"></div>

	== Notes ==		== Notes ==

Simoon at 12:22, 19 September 2024

2024-09-19T12:22:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:22, 19 September 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
			'''Edoardo Biscossi '''
	__NOTOC__		__NOTOC__
	~~'''Edoardo Biscossi '''~~

	<span class="running-header">Platform Pragmatics</span>		<span class="running-header">Platform Pragmatics</span>

Geoffcox at 12:55, 7 September 2024

2024-09-07T12:55:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:55, 7 September 2024
Line 2:		Line 2:
	'''Edoardo Biscossi '''		'''Edoardo Biscossi '''

	<span class="running-header">Platform Pragmatics~~: Labour, speculation and self-reflexivity in technologically mediated content economies~~</span>		<span class="running-header">Platform Pragmatics</span>

	= Platform Pragmatics =		= Platform Pragmatics =

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:32, 11 November 2024
Line 130:		Line 130:
	Biscossi, Edoardo, and Cosimo Campani. “Spatial Revolutions and the Seductive Power of Virtual Salvation.” ''Meta.space. Visions of Space from the Middle Ages to the Digital AgeAge,'' 1. edition, DISTANZ Verlag, 2023.		Biscossi, Edoardo, and Cosimo Campani. “Spatial Revolutions and the Seductive Power of Virtual Salvation.” ''Meta.space. Visions of Space from the Middle Ages to the Digital AgeAge,'' 1. edition, DISTANZ Verlag, 2023.

	Bratton, Benjamin H. ''The Stack: On Software and Sovereignty.'' MIT Press, 2016.		Bratton, Benjamin H. ''The Stack: On Software and Sovereignty.'' The MIT Press, 2016.

	Bucher, Taina. “Want to Be on the Top? Algorithmic Power and the Threat of Invisibility on Facebook.” ''New Media & Society,'' vol. 14, no. 7, Nov. 2012, pp. 1164–80. SAGE Journals, https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812440159.		Bucher, Taina. “Want to Be on the Top? Algorithmic Power and the Threat of Invisibility on Facebook.” ''New Media & Society,'' vol. 14, no. 7, Nov. 2012, pp. 1164–80. SAGE Journals, https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812440159.
Line 146:		Line 146:
	Fisher, Mark. ''Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative?'' Zero Books, 2009.		Fisher, Mark. ''Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative?'' Zero Books, 2009.

	Gago, Verónica. ''Neoliberalism from Below: Popular Pragmatics and Baroque Economies.'' Translated by Liz Mason-deese, Duke Univ Pr, 2017.		Gago, Verónica. ''Neoliberalism from Below: Popular Pragmatics and Baroque Economies.'' Translated by Liz Mason-deese, Duke Univ Press, 2017.

	Galloway, Alexander R., et al. ''Excommunication: Three Inquiries in Media and Mediation.'' University of Chicago Press, 2013.		Galloway, Alexander R., et al. ''Excommunication: Three Inquiries in Media and Mediation.'' University of Chicago Press, 2013.

	---. ''Protocol: How Control Exists after Decentralization.'' Edited by Roger F. Malina and Sean Cubitt, Illustrated edition, MIT Press, 2006.		---. ''Protocol: How Control Exists after Decentralization.'' Edited by Roger F. Malina and Sean Cubitt, Illustrated edition, The MIT Press, 2006.

	Glassberg, Rachel. “A Fond Farewell To The Chaotic Italian Sandwich Man Of TikTok.” ''The Takeout,'' 26 July 2022, https://www.thetakeout.com/tiktok-viral-chaotic-italian-sandwich-maker-farewell-1849331317/.		Glassberg, Rachel. “A Fond Farewell To The Chaotic Italian Sandwich Man Of TikTok.” ''The Takeout,'' 26 July 2022, https://www.thetakeout.com/tiktok-viral-chaotic-italian-sandwich-maker-farewell-1849331317/.
Line 162:		Line 162:
	Jarrett, Kylie. ''Digital Labor.'' 1. edition, Polity Press, 2022.		Jarrett, Kylie. ''Digital Labor.'' 1. edition, Polity Press, 2022.

	Kember, Sarah, and Joanna Zylinska. ''Life after New Media: Mediation as a Vital Process.'' MIT Press, 2012.		Kember, Sarah, and Joanna Zylinska. ''Life after New Media: Mediation as a Vital Process.'' The MIT Press, 2012.

	Leaver, Tama, et al. ''Instagram: Visual Social Media Cultures.'' 1. edition, Polity Pr, 2020.		Leaver, Tama, et al. ''Instagram: Visual Social Media Cultures.'' 1. edition, Polity Press, 2020.

	Lorusso, Silvio. ''Entreprecariat: Everyone Is an Entrepreneur. Nobody Is Safe.'' Onomatopee, 2019.		Lorusso, Silvio. ''Entreprecariat: Everyone Is an Entrepreneur. Nobody Is Safe.'' Onomatopee, 2019.
Line 176:		Line 176:
	Noys, Benjamin. ''The Art of Capital: Artistic Identity and the Paradox of Valorisation.'' www.academia.edu, https://www.academia.edu/689156/The_Art_of_Capital_Artistic_Identity_and_the_Paradox_of_Valorisation. Accessed 2 May 2024.		Noys, Benjamin. ''The Art of Capital: Artistic Identity and the Paradox of Valorisation.'' www.academia.edu, https://www.academia.edu/689156/The_Art_of_Capital_Artistic_Identity_and_the_Paradox_of_Valorisation. Accessed 2 May 2024.

	Portanova, Stamatia. “Camera eats first: Il rito del foodstagramming nella cultura visual contemporanea.” ''Mediascapes journal,'' vol. 21, no. 1, 1, July 2023, pp. 264–76.		Portanova, Stamatia. “Camera eats first: Il rito del foodstagramming nella cultura visual contemporanea.” ''Mediascapes journal,'' vol. 21, no. 1, July 2023, pp. 264–76.

	---. ''Whose Time Is It?: Asocial Robots, Syncolonialism, and Artificial Chronological Intelligence.'' Sternberg Pr, 2022.		---. ''Whose Time Is It?: Asocial Robots, Syncolonialism, and Artificial Chronological Intelligence.'' Sternberg Press, 2022.

	Quicho, Alex. “Everyone Is a Girl Online.” ''Wired.'' www.wired.com, https://www.wired.com/story/girls-online-culture/. Accessed 21 Dec. 2023.		Quicho, Alex. “Everyone Is a Girl Online.” ''Wired.'' www.wired.com, https://www.wired.com/story/girls-online-culture/. Accessed 21 Dec. 2023.