What does digital media allow us to “do” to one another? Economic significance of content and...

Note:Aversionofthismanuscriptwaslaterpublished.Pleaseciteitas:

Alvermann,D.E.,Beach,C.L.,&Boggs,G.L.(2016).Whatdoesdigitalmediaallowusto“do”tooneanother?Economicsignificanceofcontentandconnection.InB.Guzzetti&M.Lesley(Eds.),Handbookofresearchonthesocietalimpactofdigitalmedia(pp.1-23).Hershey,PA:IGIGlobal.

WhatDoesDigitalMediaAllowUsto“Do”toOneAnother?EconomicSignificanceofContentandConnection

DonnaE.AlvermannCrystalL.Beach

TheUniversityofGeorgia

GeorgeL.BoggsFloridaStateUniversity

WhatDoesDigitalMediaAllowUsto“Do” 2

Abstract

Thepurposeofthisintegrativereviewoftheoryandresearchistoassessthe

economicimpactofdigitalmediainwaysthatareunreachedbyinstrumentalmeans

ofmeasuringeconomicactivity.Specifically,weusethreeoverarchingarguments

identifiedfromareviewoftheliteraturethatbroadlydefinestheeconomicforceof

digitalmediacontentincontemporarysociety.Wecontextualizethoseargumentsin

termsofcurrentissuesinthefieldandgapsintheresearchbasebeforeconcluding

withadiscussionoftheimplicationsofwhatwelearnedforeducation,civic

engagement,socialpractice,andpolicy.

KeyWords:attentioneconomy,civicengagement,consumption,digitalmedia,global

society,literacypractices,mediateddigitalcontent,memes,multimodality,policy,

socialpractice.


SuccinctOverviewoftheResearch

Webeginwithanintegrativereviewoftheoryandresearchontheroleof

digitalmediaincontemporarysociety’sglobaleconomy.Definitionsofdigital

media,contemporarysociety,andglobaleconomyarebestformulatedassystems

withinsystems.Forexample,inNickCouldry’s(2012)Media,Society,World:Social

TheoryandDigitalPractice,helaysthefoundationforanewsociologyofdigital

mediaasameansofdealingwiththecomplexitiesoflivingina21stcenturymedia-

saturatedworldthatextendsbeyondthesocialtoincludetheeconomicsof

productionandconsumption.Amidunceasingcallsforeducation,policy,social

practice,andcivicengagementto“keepup”withdigitalmedia,Couldryasksamoral

questionthatholdsakey,weargue,tounderstandingthenestedeconomicimpactof

systemswithinsystems.Whatdoesdigitalmediaallowusto“do”tooneanother?

Thetermdigitalmediadefiesattemptstoreachconsensusonitsmeaning.

Wereviewliteratureontheconstructionofdigitalmediaascontent(printand

nonprint)thathasbeendigitizedandthuspotentiallyreadyfordisseminationon

theInternet.Weechotheinsistencefromvariousfieldsofresearchondigitalmedia

thatdigitalmediacontentisakindoftipoftheicebergforthewaysdigitalmediais

reorganizingandmanagingouractualandmetaphoricalhouseholdsandvillages.

Startingwithcontentservesasastartingpointfordiscussingdigitalmedia’s

broaderimpactonourlivesinthebroadsensethatCouldryintends.

Below,wepursuethreeargumentsweidentifiedfromareviewofthe

literaturethatbroadlydefinetheeconomicforceofdigitalmediacontentin

contemporarysociety.Wethencontextualizetheargumentsaboutdigitalmedia


contentintermsofrelevantsocial,political,andeconomic factorsthatmediatethe

productionofdigitalcontent.Thisapproachmakesitpossibletoassesseconomic

impactofdigitalmediainwaysthatareunreachedbyinstrumentalmeansof

measuringeconomicactivity(e.g.,Boggs,thisvolume;Chambers,2013).Weseekto

capturetheessenceofhowdigitalmediaaffectsthe“managementofthehousehold

orvillage”(AuthorC’sinterpretationofetymologyofGreekoikonomia).

Argument#1

Digitalmediainacontemporarysociety—onethatrequiresaglobalmarketplaceto

satisfydailyneeds—ismultimodal(i.e.,composedofimages,sounds,andbodily

performances,aswellasoralandwrittenlanguage).

Oneresultofthebreakdownbetweenformalandinformallearning(Dabbagh

&Kitsantas,2012;Hull,Stornaiuolo,&Sterpont,2013)istheopeningupofspacesin

whichusersexplorenewonlinewaysofparticipatingandcommunicating

specificallyinmultimodalways—waysthatrequirecollaboration,production,and

disseminationofone’sowndigitaltextsasopposedtomereconsumptionofsuch.

Mediaproductionhasalwaysbeenmultimodal,butdigitalmediamakes

multimodalityacorefeatureofinteractionswitheconomicpotential.

However,digitalmediacontentanddigitalmediaspacesuggestquite

differenteconomicpossibilities.OntheInternet,digitalcontentgeneratedbyusers,

suchasaFacebookpost,couldchangenothingoreverything,anditseems

impossibletopredict.However,thesocialspacecreatedviaFacebookhasfarmore

stable,predictable,tradableeconomicvalue.Thenewsworthybuyingandsellingof

socialmediapillarsandstartupsisonlyonepartofthepicture.Innumerable


businessesmakecalculatedinvestmentsaboutthepotentialfortheirenterprisesto

succeedthroughmergerintodigitalspacesproducedbyothervendors.

Thesedevelopmentsarenotinsignificant.Theyrepresentamajordisruptive

innovationintheproductionofsocialspace.Lefebvre(1992),inGeography,

proposedthataplacelikeacityoraruralareaataparticulartimewasasocial

construction,akindofscriptguidingbehaviorinserviceofasetofcontrolling

interests.Therapidproductionandvaluationofdistinctiveonlinespacesunderline

digitalmedia’sroleasasociallyproducedeconomicspace.

Howmanydownloadsperdollarinvestment?Howmuchtrafficisgenerated

byaslickerwebsite?Howdocustomersrelatetonewproductsthroughonline

video,livechat,andsoforthversustraditionalprintandtelephonesupport?How

manypurchasespertennewfollowers?Howmanyadditionalreservationsper

dollarspentforonlineservices?Thesequestionsresemblethoseoftheshopkeeper

orfarmer,yettheyarefollowing,accordingtoLefebvre(1992),anoverarching

ideologicalandeconomicscript.Thedistinctionbetweencontentandspacepoints

uptheeconomicimportanceofdigitalspacesassociallyconstructedtoolsthatalter

day-to-dayactivities,jobcreation,andbalancesheets.

Moreover,thesituationselicitedabovelargelyrelyonexistingspacesthat

attractinvestment.Onlinelearningspacesrepresentadifferentbutequally

importantmultimodaldigitalmediaenvironmentwhere,again,digitalcontentbyno

meansindicateseconomicimpact.InthecaseofWikipedia,forinstance,donations

purchaseserverspaceandemployeditors,buttheeconomicimpactofreadily

availableinformationcannotbequantified.Yetitisunquestionablygreaterthanthe


economicfootprintofthewebencyclopediaorganization.Onlinelearningspaces

marshallingexperts’knowledgeresourcesdailyshapeeconomicallysignificant

choicesworldwide,fromwhentoplantcornandbeanstoprojectedtradingvalues

ofthosecommodities.Networksofvariouskindshaveformedtodefineformaland

informalresearchagendasfortheirparticularareasofexpertise.However,these

networksthatconnectdigitalmediacontentanddigitalmediaspacesparticipatein

complexeconomiesbeyondthetraditionalbuying,selling,anddistributionofgoods

andservices.Theeconomicimpact,then,isamatterofpotentiatingconnection.

Onlinelearningcommunitiesspanningtheearlygradesthroughhigher

education(Ito,Gutierrez,Livingstone,Penuel,Rhodes,Salenetal.,2013)haveused

“connectedlearning”toevokethissenseofpotentiality.Areportofthework

(http://dmlhub.net/sites/default/files/ConnectedLearning_report.pdf)presentsthe

concept:

Itadvocatesforbroadenedaccesstolearningthatissociallyembedded,

interest-driven,andorientedtowardeducational,economic,orpolitical

opportunity.Connectedlearningisrealizedwhenayoungpersonisableto

pursueapersonalinterestorpassionwiththesupportoffriendsandcaring

adults,andisinturnabletolinkthislearningandinteresttoacademic

achievement,careersuccessorcivicengagement.Thismodelisbasedon

evidencethatthemostresilient,adaptive,andeffectivelearninginvolves

individualinterestaswellassocialsupporttoovercomeadversityand

providerecognition.(p.2)


Theninecasestudiesdetailedinthereportdemonstratehowtheconnected

learningframeworkaddressesourinterestinknittingtogethereducation,civic

engagement(bothlocalandglobal),socialpractice,andpolicy.

NumerousresearchprojectsconfirmItoetal.’sorientationtowardchoice

andculturalrelevanceintheexpansionofdigitalmediaasaneconomically

meaningfulpartoflife(e.g.,Kleine,2010;Mansell,2001;Selwyn,2004).Insum,

then,digitalmediaiscruciallymultimodal,bothintermsofdigitizedcontentaswell

asinthesocialinteractionsitmediates:theproductionofnewsocialspacesandthe

facilitationoflearningforeconomicallysignificantaction.

Argument#2

Givenallthefreneticactivityassociatedwithonlinebroadly-definedtextproductions,

virtualcollaborations,andnovicedisseminationefforts,asavvyconsumerwillmake

decisionsaboutwhatdigitalcontentisworthyofattentionandwhatisnot.

Nearlytwodecadesago,aneconomistnamedMichaelGoldhaber(1997)

predictedthattheeconomicsofattentionincreasinglyimportantintheglobalage,as

aglutofinformation,news,andentertainmentfloodedcommunicationpathways.

Herestedhiseconomicsofattentiononthecommonlyacceptednotionthata

resourcethatisinshortsupplywillbeinhighdemand.Thescarceresource,for

Goldhaber,washumanattention.

Attentioneconomyisnotalaissezfairetheoryofdigitalmediathatgives

marketdynamicsresponsibilityforproducingquality.Instead,scarcityofattention

guidesthedesignsofdigitalspaces,effortstoregulateaccesstocertainkindsof

informationdeemed“spam”orantisocial,policiesthatprotectintellectualproperty,


andcampaignstograntorincreaseaccesstodigitalmedia.Eachoftheaboveareas

assumestheeconomicimportanceofinterwovenonlineandless-connectedaspects

ofourlives.Garneringandcontrollingattentionviadigitalmediaisanimportant

partofalteringeconomicbehavior,especially,butalsopoliticalandpersonalas

well.

Theattentioneconomyhelpsexplainwhydigitalmediaisanunstable

constellationofever-changingplatforms.Thequestforhighranksinsearchengine

resultsillustrateshowattentioneconomydrivesthecontinualrefinementof

informationdeliveryontheweb.Again,theeconomicimpactofattaininghighrank

onGooglehasobviousyethardlyquantifiableimpact.Moreimportantly,the

developmentofnewopportunitiesforinteractingdigitallyresultsinfundamental

changesinhumaninteractions,drivenindirectlybyqueststostayontopofsearch

enginerankings,earnprivilegedstatusinamobileappstore,orotherwisejustify

investors’risk.

Argument#3

Theroleofdigitalmediaincontemporarysociety’sglobaleconomyisreflectedinthe

speedwithwhichmemes—e.g.,images,videos,soundeffects,songsandthelikeare

copiedandspreadrapidlybyInternetusers—typicallywithoutregardforwhetherthe

messageorintendedmeaningisclearornot.

Withfewexceptions,digitalmediacontentreadilyaccommodatesstrategic

re-use.Internetmemesexpressdigitalmedia’saffordanceforsharingandre-

combination.However,theyexposeaseriousvulnerabilityofdiscussingdigital

mediaascontentonly,sincetheimportanceofmemesrestsintheirstrategicuse


andpopularity(i.e.,socialelements),andtheirpower(i.e.,politicalandideological

elements).Onlinestrategicsharingofexcerptedinformationfornewusers’

purposesunderscorestheweaknessofacontent-orientedassessmentofdigital

media’sworkuponus.Economically,thememestandsfordigitalmedia’scapacityto

blendthehumanandnonhumanelementsofgeographically,politically,andeven

temporallydisparategroupsordividedpeopleotherwiseenjoyingfellowship.The

productionofnewhouseholdsorvillagesmanifestedinmassivelyorlocallypopular

memesdisplaystheeconomicmuscleofdigitalmediaasitworksuponus.

Acommoncritiqueofdigitalmedia’sapparentdisregardforaccuracyin

communicatingmessagesonlineisharboredinmemesthatgoviral.Forexample,in

a2002TEDtalk,DanDennett,aphilosopherandcognitivescientist,unleasheda

barrageofideasthatledto1,266,365viewsasofOctober26,2014aboutwhy

memesaredangerousandinneedofmonitoring

(www.ted.com/talks/dan_dennett_on_dangerous_memes?language=en).Briefly,

Dennettarguedthatamemeisoftenmisused,evenabused,witheachrepetitionof

anideathatamemecomestorepresents.Topreventamemefrombeing

caricaturedbypeopleintentonturningabenignideaintoavariantideathatis

dangerouswhenspreadbyindividualsbentonservingtheirownneedsorcauses,

Dennettclaimswemustbeevervigilant.Helikensamemetoavirus,givingRichard

Dawkins(1976)creditforthatterm,whichspreadsandbecomestoxictothosewho

havenoimmunitytoit.Here,Dennettisspeakingofculturalmemes—ideas

toleratedinonecommunitybutviewedasabhorrentinanothercommunity.


Forexample,thewell-knownmemefeaturingDonDraperfromthetelevision

showMadMenhasgoneviralwiththesaying,“Theysayawoman’sworkisnever

done.Maybethat’swhytheygetpaidless”(Gallagher,2014).Here,weseea

messagebeingspreadonlinethatdepictstherealitythatwomenarepaidlessthan

menintheworkforcetoday.Yet,thepremisebehindMadMenistoactuallybring

thoseissuesofinjusticetolight(Gallagher,2014).

ForpurposesofillustratingArgument#3,weusedDennett’sTEDtalkon

dangerousmemesastheimpetusforminingasubstantivebodyofcriticalmedia

research(Meehan,2002;Smythe,2006).Keytointerpretingthatliteratureisa

knowledgeofhowthefeministpoliticaleconomistEileenMeehan’s(2002)research

shiftedanearlierfocusonlarge-scale,impersonalmediacorporationsandtheir

shapingofculturalcommoditiesandmediamarketstoafocusonwomenwho

workedinthemediaindustries.Meehanarguedthatdespitewhatpleasuresa

vieweroutsidethecommoditymarket,whichatthattimeequatedtowhite,18-34

year-oldheterosexualmales,televisionwasanagentofoppression.Expandingon

Meehan’searlierclaim,weseeaparallelinsomevideogames’digitizedcontentthat

resultsinonlineharassmentofwomen

http://www.democracynow.org/2014/10/20/women_are_being_driven_offline_fe

minist).Themarketpotentialofsuchmisogynistonlinevideogamesdemonstrates

theeconomicmuscleofdigitalmediaasitworkstotransformwomenintomere

commodities.

CurrentIssuesintheField


Thepurposeofthissectionistodescribethelinkagesbetweenthethree

moregeneralargumentsalreadyidentifiedandthespecificrelationshipsofpower

thatembedthemselvesinthosearguments.Webeginwithanobservationthat

occurredtousaswereadbroadlyintheliteratureondigitalmedia:thatis,

technologytodaycreatesanexcitingterrainforsocietytocreateinwaysithasbeen

unabletodobeforenow.PeoplewithaccesstotheInternetareabletonavigatethe

digitalmediaspherewithrelativeeasedespiteanabundanceofinformationthat

comesatthemfromeveryangleandatalltimes.Itisanincessantdisplayof

affordancesthatindividualsbeforethe21stcenturycouldnothaveimagined,except

perhapsinasciencefictionfilmthatprovidedviewerswithaglimpseintoallthat

couldbeconnectedinaworldoftouchscreensandotherdigitaldevices.

Yet,thefreedomsuchaffordancesprovideintermsofcommunication

channels,especiallythosewithnontraditionalwaysofcommunicating,makesdigital

mediacontentanddigitalmediaspacescompetefortheuser’sattention.For

example,what“app”onaphonewillhelpuscreatethatperfecttouchtoourphoto?

Which“hashtag”onasocialmediasite,suchasTwitter,willmostquicklyreacha

groupoflike-mindedfolkstoletthemknowanewsonghasjustbeenreleased?

Whatcanweaddtoouronlineprofiletodrawpeopletoourpage?Thesequestions

pointtoanoverallbiggerissue,namely,how,andmoreimportantly,whydoesone

havetimetointeractwithmost,orevensome,ofthedigitalmediaavailabletoday?

Furthermore,ifdigitalmediaismultimodal,readilyavailable,andparticipatoryhow

dotheconsumersandproducersimpactthespacesinwhichtheyareconnected

throughthedigitalmedia?Whiletherearenoeasyorsimpleanswerstothese


questions,slicingitintosmallerbits,suchasthethreesub-issuesexaminednext,is

asgoodastartingpointasany.

DigitalMedia’sChallengetoTraditionalPrintLiteracyPractices

Multimodalityreferstoformsofcommunicationthatextendbeyondprint

only.Briefly,multimodalityviews“representation,communication,andinteraction

assomethingmorethanlanguage”(Jewitt,2011,p.1).Asnotedpreviouslyinthis

chapter,boundariesbetweenformalandinformallearningarebeingbrokendown

(Dabbagh&Kitsantas,2012;Hull,Stornaiuolo,&Sterpont,2013),andoursocietyis

takingamoreconnectedapproachtoitsinteractions(Itoetal.,2013).Theproblem,

however,isthatmultimodalitychallengestraditionalprint-basedliteracypractices

andnotallparents,researchers,administrators,teachers,andteachereducators

likethechangestheyseeoccurring.Forexample,high-stakestestingremainsonthe

radarandcontinuestodrawheateddebates.Standardizedtestscomeinfortheir

shareofcritiquelargelybecausetheytraditionallyprivilegeprint-basedreadingand

writingskillsatatimewhenmanyyoungliteracylearnerswithhigh-speedInternet

accessareusingmultiplemodesofcommunicationanddigitalmedia(e.g.,stilland

movingimages,sounds,gestures,andliveperformances)tointeractwithothers

withinbothlocalandglobalspaces.Thus,thedisconnectsinlearningthatcan

developwhentraditionalliteracypracticesmeettechnology-rich,multimodalways

ofperceivingarequitestarkandcreatechallengesonallfronts(Leu,Kinzer,Coiro,

Castek,&Henry,2013).

Dueto“changingrelationshipstotruthandauthority—inwhichknowledge

isnolongercertainorstable”(Jewitt,2001,p.3),wenowareexperiencing


“mediatedinteractions”inwhichknowledgeisconsumed,produced,and

disseminatedinavarietyofcomplexwaysallofwhichimpacttheeconomiccapital

withinthedigitalsphere.Tolimitourunderstandingofthese(social)complexities

wouldbetoactasif“social,cultural,andhistoricalconditionsofsocieties”werenot

interconnectedatall(Jewitt,2011,p.5).Inotherwords,whilemultimodalityhas

“emergedfromlinguistictheories”(Jewitt,2011,p.6)andpullsfromatraditional

foundation,itallowsusacertainflexibilitytoengagewithandquestionwhat

constitutesatext.Furthermore,multimodalityhelpsusseewhyandhowpeople

becomeauthorsoftexts,howtextsarereadwithinsituations,andhowwecan

analyzethesemediatedtexts,aswellastheresponsesthattheyproduceoutsideof

thetraditionaldefinitionofprint-basedlanguageonly.

Whenwelookbeyondthetraditionaldefinitionoflanguage,westarttosee

howavarietyof“modes”facilitatevarietiesofparticipationindigitalmedia

environments.Kress(2011)definesamodeas“asociallyshapedandculturally

givenresourceformakingmeaning”(p.54).Forexample,youthusemediathatis

“convergedaroundmultifunctionalscreensthatintegratevoiceandtext

communication,imageandvideo,games,photography,music,television,print,and

apps”(Ito,etal.,p.28).Theseuser-friendlytoolstrainusforaneweconomyin

whichdigitalmediaallowsandrequiresustoconnecttoothersinwaysthatextend

beyondmeaningsintonewformsofformalandinformaleconomicactivity.

Thus,asourcontemporarysocietybecomesmoregloballyconnected

throughdigitalinteractions,literacypracticesshift.Inthesedigitalmediaspaces,it

becomespossibletobeusedbyourliteraciesevenasweusethemforourown


purposes(Brandt&Clinton,2002).Forthisreason,effortstoexpandliteracy

practicesofstudentsbecomeentangledineconomicimperativesofforging

connectionsamonglocalandglobalcommunities.

Thisentanglementworksuponliteracyeducationinmultipledirections.

Teachersmaybeusingdigitalmediatohelppreparestudentstoengagewiththe

literacypracticesthatallowthemtoparticipateintheglobaleconomythrough

connectedlearningopportunities(Itoetal.,2013),butregionalornationalpolitical

andeconomicinterests—representedbydepartmentsofeducation,educational

textbookpublishers,andcurriculumandassessmentdevelopers,tonameafew—

worktostandardizeoutcomesofformalschoolingthatdonotnecessarilyfocus

uponthoseopportunities.Testingdemands,financialcommitmentstocurriculum

developers,andthepoliticsofeducationcanstiflethedifficultworkofbuilding

authenticclassroomconnectionswithlocalandglobalcommunities.Asaresult,

manyclassroomsstillprivilegeprint-basedlanguageusesoverdigitalmedia.

AsItoetal.(2013)suggest,itisnotthatsocietyshouldabandontraditional

literacyskills,butinsteaditshouldfocuson“diversifyingandmultiplyingentry

pointsandpathwaystoopportunityandmeaningfulparticipationinsociety”(p.34).

Students’literacyfutures,identities,andopportunitiesasproductiveconsumersand

producerswithinsocietytodaycollidewitheffortsofastrongcentralgovernmentto

safeguardexistingeconomiccommitmentstotheteachingprofession,

manufacturing,publishingindustries,highereducation,andothereconomic

dynamosofbygoneyears.


Byallowingourdefinitionsoftextsandtheirmeaningstoencompass

multimodalitythroughdigitalmedia,weallowstudentsmoreopportunitiestouse

languageinwaysthatvaluetheirexperiences,knowledgesets,beliefs,andlearning

spaces.Furthermore,thisexpansionofthetraditionaldefinitionsthatprivilege

print-onlytextsleavesroomforinnovativeprojectssuchastheEuropeanaSpace

Project(http://www.europeana-space.eu).Thisprojectfocusesoncreating“new

opportunitiesforemploymentandeconomicgrowthwithinthecreativeindustries

sectorbasedonEurope’srichdigitalculturalresources.”Thus,itsstrengthliesinits

abilitytouseavailabledigitalmediainwaysthatincorporatesmultimodal

“language”topreparestudentstobeeffectivemembersinaglobalsociety.Atthe

sametime,thedevelopmentofnewliteraciesamongstudentspositionthemtobe

exploitedbythepotentiallyadverseeconomicconditionsofthenewworkorder

(Gee,Hull,&Lankshear,1996).Underitsterms,thebuzzwordsofthenew

economy—democratic,horizontalorganizationandcollaboration—maskeconomic

directionsthatpreservestatusquoandmaintaintraditionalboundariesofwealth

andpower.

Inordertocommunicateeffectivelywithinthegloballandscape,webuild

“languagetoolboxes”tohelpusunderstandhowmessagesarerepresentedina

varietyofformatsandwhattheyaresupposedtomeantoothersandtoourselves

(Ivarsson,Linderoth,&Säljö,2011,p.203).Withintheeconomicsphere,advertisers

wantconsumerstousetheirtoolboxestoembedeverypartoftheircompany’s

messageintotheirdailylives.Ivarsson,Linderoth,andSäljö(2011)believethat

“representationsserveasresourcesforcommunicatingandmeaningmaking,and


theyareessentialtoallhumanpracticesincludingperception,remembering,and

thinkingandotherpsychologicalactivities”(p.201).Forthisreason,the“mediated

action,”ortheprocessofintegratingtheproducer’smessageintoourdailylives,is

alwaysimportanttokeepinmind(Ivarsson,Linderoth,&Säljö,2011,p.211)when

wearetryingtounderstandthespaceinwhichatext’scontentdevelopsits

economicimpactforitsaudience.

Whenweconsiderdigitalmediacontenthere,weseethatifthecontentis

takenupbyacompany’sconsumers,thenthisconsumptionisthedrivingforce

behindallofthemediatedactionsthatre-deliversthemessageinavarietyof

multimodalformats.UsingtheInternetasanexample,weknowthatwebsitesare

feedingusuniquecontent(throughwords,images,videos,andthelike)thatwe

potentiallyconsiderinourownlives.ThisprocessofexpandingtheInternetto

becomeameansofnavigating,thinking,speaking,andlivingisanattempttofoster

atonceanindividual’sownrepresentationandaconduitforvastnewdomainsof

economicparticipation.Thus,withtheproliferationofpotentialforasserting

meaningcomesimmeasurable“traffic,”oravolumeofdigitalmediaactivityon

whichitseconomicpowerrests.And,ifmoreimmeasurabletrafficispresent,then

onemustbegintoquestionifconsumersareduped,or,infact,quitesavvywiththe

digitalmediawithwhichtheywork.

MediaDupesorSavvyConsumers?

Priortothe1970swhenStuartHall’s(1973)workinwhatcametobecalled

“culturalstudies”madeitsmarkinintellectualdebates,mediaaudienceswere

viewedasmeredupesofpopularcultureandmasscommunication.Thoughnot


digitizedatthetime,mediaproducers’contentwasthoughttorepresenttheway

peoplewerepositionedintheworldandtheirinabilitytodolittletocounteract

suchrepresentation.Hall,whowasthenProfessorofSociologyinEngland’sOpen

University,downplayedtheroleofmediacontentanditsinfluenceonviewers’

meaning-makingabilities.Hallcontendedthatimagesdonothavestablemeanings,

andthatproducers’intentionsatthetimeofcreationdonotguaranteethat

audienceswilltakeupsuchmeanings.ItwouldbeamistaketocharacterizeHallas

believingthatmedianearlyfivedecadesago,andespeciallycontemporarydigital

media,havenorealandsignificantsocial,political,andeconomiceffectsonthe

world.Herealizedfullytheinfluenceofcontentanditsintersectionwithpowerful

forcesinsociety,especiallyinrelationtowhatgetsrepresentedinthemedia.

However,wecontendthatonlywithLatour’s(2007)workonreassembling

thesocialsothatitaccountsfornonhumanactants—atermthatLatour(2007)used

todenoteanentitywhetherhumanornonhumanthatmodifiestheactionsof

anotherentity(e.g.,pouringvinegaronbakingsoda)—hasitbecomepossibleto

traceassociations“betweenthingsthatarenotthemselvessocial”(p.5).Latour

boldlyseparatedhisworkfrompostmodernism’sattempttodeconstructgrand

narrativesthathavelongheldpeopletohegemonicpractices,whichharmrather

thanadvancetheirfreedoms.InLatour’swords,“Dispersion,destruction,and

deconstructionarenotthegoalstobeachievedbutwhatneedstobeovercome”(p.

11).ProponentsofnewmaterialismwhohaveincorporatedmuchofLatour’swork

continuetoredefinetheroleofnonhumanactants.Mostrecently,posthumanist

philosophers(e.g.,Braidotti,2013)andnewmaterialistscholarssuchaspolitical


theoristJaneBennett(2010)useLatour’s(2007)andDeleuzeandGuattari’s(1987)

conceptofassemblages—adhocgroupingsofhumanandnonhumanelements—to

arguethatagencyisnotstrictlyahumancapacity.InBennett’s(2010)words,the

materialelementsinanassemblage,“whiletheyincludehumansandtheir(social,

legal,linguistic)constructions,alsoincludesomeveryactiveandpowerful

nonhumanactants:electrons,trees,wind,fire,electromagneticfields”(p.24).To

thislistofnonhumanactants,wewouldadddigitalmedia.

JustasLatourandtheposthumanistmovementhavesoughttoeventhe

playingfieldthatwascentraltoHall’s(1973)concernaboutrepresentationandthe

media,sotoohaveeducationresearchersworkedtodemonstratetheinterface

betweenhumanandnonhumanactants.Forexample,Bigum,Knobel,Lankshear,

andRowan’s(2003)researchillustrateshowdigitalmediacontentandspace

exacerbatetensionsthatexistbetweenthehighlyregulatedeconomicsofattention

insideschoolsascontrastedwiththerelativelyderegulatedeconomicsofattention

outsideschools,particularlyinsituationswheremassmediaandnew

communicationtechnologiesdominate.

Specifically,Bigumandhisco-researchersstudiedagroupofGrade9boys

whoattendedaruralschoolwithInternetaccessinnorthernAustralia’seastern

coast.Theirparticipantswereinitiallyviewedas“disadvantaged”intermsof“the

lads’‘inability’tocarryoutthekindsofliteracybasedactivitiesregardedas

mainstreamforGrade9English”(p.103).Insidetheirschool’sregulated

curriculum,theGrade9boysattractednegative,evenpunitive,attention—thekind

thatoftenresultedininstructionthatmerelyre-inscribedtheboys’senseoffailure.


However,whenBigumetal.intervenedwithaprojectthatinvolvedtheboysin

constructingawebsiteonmotorcycles—aninterestthatstemmedfromaprevious

projectinwhichtheycreatedamotorcyclemagazine—the“disadvantaged”lads

werepositionedasexpertsinanareathatattractedpositiveattentionfromtheir

peersandsupervisingteacher.

Thisrolereversal(goingfrom“disadvantaged”toexpert)demonstrates

digitalmedia’smediatingeffectsontraditionalwaysofthinkingofdefining“failure”

anditssupposedfixedorpermanentplaceineducationdiscourse.Wesubmitthat

withdigitalmediaasaplayer,so-calledfailureisanideathatteachersandstudents

mightjointlychallengeintheirefforttoengagewithlearningontheirownterms.In

doingso,theymightalsofindreasonstodiscardpreviousnegativeevaluationsof

studentperformance.

DigitalMedia’sDisruptionofTraditionalMeaningMaking

Researchersworkingwithincontemporarydigitalmediaculture,especially

intherealmofsocialmedia,havereportednumerousinstancesinwhichtheeffect

ofpeople’sinteractionsismoreimportantthanthecontentormeaningderived

fromthoseinteractions(Varis&Blommaert,2015).Anearlierrecognitionofthis

phenomenonisattributedtoVincentMiller(2008),asociologistandsocial

researcherwhonotedthatinthedigitalage,“Weareseeinghowinmanywaysthe

Internethasbecomeasmuchaboutinteractionwithothersasithasaboutaccessing

information”(p.398).AnyonewhoparticipatesinFacebookandTwitteriswell

awareofhowmemes(orsignsthatgoviral,suchastheDonDrapermemediscussed

earlier)aremorecharacteristicofnetworksinvolvinghumanandnonhuman


entitiesthantheyareofcommunitiesinwhichsocialinteractionisnotdependent

ontheinternet.

Particularlyinthedigitalworld,relyingonthedisruptionofmeaningasa

motivatingfactorinproducingandconsumingmediacontentiscomplicatedby

issuesoffairuseandthemarketplace,especiallywhentransformativeremixingis

involved.JoyceValenza(2009),aschoollibrarymediaspecialistinasuburban

Philadelphiahighschool,explainedtransformativenessthisway:

Whenauserofcopyrightedmaterialsaddsvalueto,orrepurposesmaterials

forausedifferentfromthatforwhichitwasoriginallyintended,itwilllikely

beconsideredtransformativeuse;itwillalsolikelybeconsideredfairuse.

Fairuseembracesthemodifyingofexistingmediacontent,placingitinnew

context.

Examplesoftransformativenessmightinclude:usingcampaignvideoina

lessonexploringmediastrategiesorrhetoric,usingmusicvideostoexplore

suchthemesasurbanviolence,usingcommercialadvertisementstoexplore

messagesrelatingtobodyimageorthevariousdifferentwaysbeermakers

sellbeer,remixingapopularsongtocreateanewartisticexpression.

(Valenza,2009,para.6and7).

LegalbackingforValenza’sinterpretationoftransformativenessgrewoutofastudy

conductedbyAufderheideandJaszi(2008)attheCenterforSocialMediain

Washington,DC,inwhichtheresearchersconcluded that a “significant set of

creative practices is potentially both legal and at risk of curtailment by


currently discussed ways to control online piracy and theft of copyrighted

works” (Executive Summary, para. 2).

Usingcopyrightedmaterialtomakesomethingnew—whatnotedmedia

scholarReneeHobbs(2010)callsrepurposing—isstillagrayareainthefieldof

legalstudiesduetorecurringbattlesoverpiratedcontent.Asaresult,researchers

whowanttostudytheuseofdigitalmediaforcreativepurposeshaveincreasingly

turnedtononprofitorganizationssuchasCreativeCommons(CC)

(www.creativecommons.org)forguidanceinhowtosharecontentlegally.Astudy

byAlvermann,Beach,andJohnson(2014)isacaseinpoint.Theco-researchers

designedapublicwebsite,Becoming3lectric(www.becoming3lectric.com),forthe

purposeofstudyingthedegreetowhichremixingdigitalcontentwouldpushthe

boundariesofauthorialintentandownership.TheysettledonaCClicensethatmet

theiruniversity’srequirementsforstudyingandprotectinghumansubjects.Asa

result,contributorstoBecoming3lectricarelegallyabletocollaborate,repurpose,

andsharetheirremixeswhileretainingtheirchoiceofoptions.Forinstance,

contributorsmaynotwanttoallowanycommercialrepurposingoftheirwork,but

stillallowotherstobuilduponthatworkiftheyarecreditedforit.Or,theymayopt

touploadtheirworkwithoutgrantingothersanyremixingprivilegesortherightto

analyzetheirwork.

Withitsvariouslicensesforworkingflexiblyandresponsiblywithdigital

texts,CChelpspeopleforgenewwaysofdisseminatingmultimodalcontentthat

mightotherwisebeimpossible.Furthermore,asSuthersanen(2007)haspointed

out,“Nowadays…do-it-yourselftools,includingtheCClicensingregime,empower


andenableindividualauthorsofliteraryandmusicalworkstoretainmorecontrol

overtheirwork”(p.60).Theoretically,CChasflattenedtheglobalmarketplacein

termsofwhocanparticipate,aswellaswhatkindsofknowledgecount.

GapsintheResearch

Twomajortopicsintheliteratureontheroleofdigitalmediain

contemporarysociety’sglobaleconomyforwhichlittleresearchhasbeengenerated

arethese:inequalityineconomicopportunityandthegeneralfalloutfromuntapped

digitalspacesandconnections.

InequalityinEconomicOpportunity

SpeakingattheAmericanEducationalResearchAssociation’stenthannual

Brownv.BoardofEducationlecture,GaryOrfield(2014),DistinguishedResearch

ProfessorofEducation,Law,PoliticalScience,andUrbanPlanningattheUniversity

ofCalifornia,LosAngelescalledforanewcivilrightsagenda.Specifically,Orfield

arguedthatwhiletheUnitedStatescontinuestocelebrateMartinLutherKing,Jr.

andothercivilrightsleaders,asanationitcurrentlyisfailingtofocusontherights

thatarebeinglost.Hespecificallycalledattentiontothefactthatcloseto60years

afterBrownv.BoardofEducation,40%ofBlackandLatino/astudentsareinwhat

hedescribedas“intenselysegregatedschools...withabouttwicethepoverty

concentrationoftheschoolsofWhitesandAsians”(p.273).Tofurthercomplicate

attitudesoflowexpectationsforchildreninpovertyschoolsinwhichadvanced

intellectualworkisviewedasbeingbeyondtheirreach,alltoooftenscarcedigital

technologiesareusedforbasicskillanddrillactivities.

EchoingOrfield’sgrimobservation,Itoandhercolleagues(2013)described


whattheyperceiveasadownwardtrendinequalopportunityforsociety’sleast

welloffstudents:Overmuchofournation’shistory,expandingeducational

opportunityhasbeen,infactandinperception,akeyelementinthe‘risingtidethat

liftsallboats.’[Currently],afterthirtyyearsofsteadilyrisingeconomicinequalityin

theUnitedStates,thattideisnowrunningout,andoureducationalsystemmaybe

doingmoretoperpetuateandeventoincreaseinequalitythantoexpandeconomic

opportunity”(p.13).

Intheirdiscussion,Itoetal.(2013)pointtoeducationalinstitutionsasplaces

thatcatertoonlyacertaingroupofstudentsdespitethefactthattheeconomyand

workforcehavebecomeincreasinglycompetitiveandlimitedevenforjobseekers

withacollegedegree.Theydrawfromtheirpoolofdatatoarguethateducational

institutionsofferprogramswithalternativecareerpathstomeetanincreasingly

diverseapplicantpool.And,aspreviouslydiscussed,theyrecommendthat

institutions“expandanddiversifymeaningfullifeoptionsandpathwaysavailableto

youngpeople”orelsetheywillbe“reinforcinganeducationalsystemthatonly

servestheinterestsofelites,breedingacultureofcompetitionforscarce

opportunities(Itoetal.,2013,p.14).

Insum,claimingthatcurrentlyamajorityofinstitutions’responsestothe

needforequalityineconomicopportunityisunacceptable,Itoandhercolleagues

(2013)callforanincreasedawarenessofhow“inaworldofglobalinterconnections

andrapidchange,effectivelearningislifelongandintegratedintotherealworldof

work,civicengagement,andsocialparticipation”(p.14).Forthisawarenesstogrow

andbecomesecondnaturetosociety’swayofthinkingaboutinequality,amajor


shiftinhowwedefineopportunitymustfirstoccur.

AstudyfundedbytheWilliamT.GrantFoundation(Carter&Reardon,2014)

isastartingpoint.Thisreportbeginstofillagapintheresearchliteratureonthe

roleofdigitalmediaincontemporarysocietybecauseitlaysoutastrategicresearch

agenda,whichifheeded,couldproducemorethansimplyadvocatingforsocial

justiceandaccesstohigh-speedinternet.Briefly,CarterandReardon(2014)

strategizearesearchprogramthatwouldhaveresearchersfocusonthefollowing

questions:a)howdounequalopportunitiesoccurinsidiouslyovertime,b)what

socialprocessespreserveinequality,c)whichstrategiescanreducethe

consequencesofsocialinequality,andd)whatmechanismsareatworkthatmake

thedistributionofinequalitytakenforgranted?

FalloutfromUntappedDigitalSpacesandConnections

Digitalmediacontentisreorganizingandmanagingnumerousaspectsofour

livesonadailybasisasCouldry(2012)contends.However,lessoftenstudiedand

reportedintheresearchliteratureonadolescents’out-of-schoolusesofdigital

mediaisthepointthatinteractionsbetweenhumanandnonhumanactantshave

valuableeconomicpotential.School-ageyoungpeople’spreferencesforproducing

andlearningwithmultimodaltextsthatcombinemovingandstillimages,sounds,

performances,icons,symbols,andthelikesuggeststhattheirwaysoftelling,

listening,viewing,andthinkinginout-of-schooldigitalenvironmentshavepotential

forinformingboththeirin-schoolidentitiesaslearnersandhencethetrajectories

theywillfollowaftergraduation(Alvermann,2010;Ito,Horst,Bittani,boyd,Herr-

Stephenson,Lange,etal.,2008;McClenaghan&Doecke,2010;Rennie&Patterson,


2010;Skinner&Hagood,2008;Thomas,2007;Walsh,2008).

Yetitisgenerallythecasethattheworkofstudentswhoself-identifyas

usersandproducersofmultimodaldigitaltextsontheirowntermsandtimeis

rarelyvisibletoteachers.Alvermann(2011)linkedthisphenomenontoother

researchthatsuggestedfourbarrierstoteachersbecomingawareofwhattheir

studentsareproducingonlineinafter-schoolhours.Briefly,shereliedontwokey

tenetstoanalyzeresearchfindingsonyoungpeople’sout-of-schooluseofdigital

media.Thefirstisthattoday’syouthinteractwitheachotherandthewebinways

thatrelyoncollectivemeaningmaking,whichJenkins(2006b)describesasa

conditioninwhich“noneofuscanknoweverything;eachofusknowssomething;

andwecanputthepiecestogetherifwepoolourresourcesandcombineourskills”

(p.4).Thesecondtenetisthatliteracyisasocialpractice(Gee,1990;Street,1993)

andthusimplicatedinsocialreasonsforgettingthingsdone(Barton,Hamilton,&

Ivanic,2000),whetherforsocial,ideological,oreconomicgain.Experiencingsocial

connectednesswhileengagingcollectivelyinonlineliteracypracticesaffordsa

senseofbelongingandanopportunitytoidentifywithotherswhohavesimilar

interestsbutmayvaryintheirskillsandaccesstomaterialresources.

AmongthenumerousfindingsthatAlvermann(2011)reportedareseveral

thatpointtobarriers,whichifovercome,couldopenspacesformorefreely

exchanginginformation,motivations,andaccomplishments.Thefirstofthesewas

theprevailingassumptionthatmultimodaldigitalcontentdistracts.Asecond

barrierconsistedofsociallyconstructedartificialdichotomiesbetweenin-and-out-

ofschoollearning(e.g.,schoolsmustbeheldaccountableforcoveringaset


curriculumwhereasafter-schoolonlinelearningisjustforfun).Third,theresultsof

somestudiesAlvermann(2011)analyzedsuggestedthatprofessionaldevelopment

effortsaimedatbuildingteachers’awarenessoftheroleofdigitalmediaintheir

students’livesfallflatwhenattemptsatmediatedactionresultinshort-lived

interventionsthatrelymoreontalkingthetalkthanwalkingthewalk.Finally,a

fourthandall-encompassingbarrierwasthemistakenassumptionthatage-old

tensionsbetweeninstitutionalauthorityandyouthidentitypoliticscouldbeeasily

resolved.Whenschoolsandadultsarepositionedasexpertsonalltopicsand

students(novices)onfewornone,thepotentialforin-schoollearningtocapitalize

onthedigitalliteracyskills,interests,andcompetenciesthatyoutharefreeto

explore,trade,andexpandoninonlinespaces.

ImplicationsforEducation,CivicEngagement,

SocialPractice,andPolicy

Here,ourpurposeistohighlighttheimplicationsofthischapter’sintegrative

reviewoftheoryandresearchontheroleofdigitalmediaincontemporarysociety’s

globaleconomy.Specifically,weaddressimplicationsforeducation,civic

engagement(globalandlocal),socialpractice,andpolicy.Indoingthis,wedraw

fromeachofthethreeargumentsinSection1ofthechapterthatplayoutin

overlappingwaysthroughsupportingevidence(Section2)orlackthereof(Section

3)toinformthislastsectiononimplications.

Education

Withtheincreasingfocusonnewliteracypracticesanddigitalmediawithin

classroomstoday,thereisnotaquestionofwhyweshouldstudydigitalmediain


contemporarysocietytoday,buthowweshouldandcanstudyitsimplicationsfor

theglobaleconomy.Whenpreparingstudentswiththeskillstheywillneedtobe

productivemembersoftheglobaleconomy,weknowthatwearecurrently

preparingthemforjobsthathaveyettobecreatedwithskillsthatmaybecome

outdated.Teachers,andbyextensioneducationalresearcherstakeonmoral

responsibilityforthewaysinwhichwepositionchildrentohavetheirskills

exploitedeconomically.

Nonetheless,aspreviouslydiscussed,“multipleformsofliteracyhavebeen

namedintheliteratureincludinginformationliteracy,visualliteracy,computeror

digitalliteracy,andmedialiteracy,butthereisconsiderableoverlapbetweenthese

forms”(Considine,Horton,andMoorman,2009,p.471-472).Theproblemisnot

howthesemultipleformsofliteracyoverlap,butinstead,howwebegintohelp

today’sstudentsnavigatetheseoverlapstobetterunderstandtheirrolein

contemporaryeconomies.

Whenwetakea“critical”approachtohowmediaandcultureareimpacting

classrooms,webringan“understandingofideology,power,anddomination”tohelp

studentsexplore“howpower,media,andinformationarelinked”(Kellner&Share,

2007,p.8).Forthesereasons,thereisanincreasingneedfortoday’sstudentsto

activelyandcriticallyconsumeandproduceinboththeclassroomandtheirlives

outsideofschool,too.Withtheexpectationoftheirincreasedengagementcomes

responsibilitytohelpstudentsask,aswehaveinthischapter,whatshoulddigital

mediabeabletodotous?


Forexample,Jocson’s(2010)studythatnotedtheneedfor“critical

multiculturalism”(p.78)isimportanttoconsiderwhenwethinkaboutthe

“dialogicalrelationshipbetweenconsumptionandproductionandwhatitmeansfor

youthwhoactivelyengagevariousmediaforms”(p.79).Infact,asweknow,“many

youngpeoplearenotjustconsumingculturalmediabutalsoproducingand

distributingtheirown”(Jocson,2010,p.80).ForJocson,herqualitativeresearch

focusontheprocess,product,andpractice(p.80)helpedherunderstandthe

students’poetrythroughhercriticalmulticulturallens.Shenotesthat“to

understandthepoemistounderstandtheactualproduction”(Jocson,2010,p.84)

andthat“youthareactiveconsumersaswellasknowledgeproducerswhowith

supportfromothersareabletoparticipateinademocraticorderandconfront

socialinequitiesintheirlives”(Jocson,2010,p.86).Theprocessshedescribeshere

andtheoutcometiesbacktotherolereversalthatdemonstratesdigitalmedia’s

mediatingeffectsthatallowstudentsbetheexpertsinspacesthatextendbeyond

theclassroomwalls.

Economically,thetechnologicalchangesencapsulatedbythetermdigital

mediasignalsthepossibilityforclassroomstomoveoutofaperpetual“research

anddevelopment”existence.Studentscancreateinavarietyofwaysthatextends

beyondclassroomwallsorthepagesofabook.Theirpostscangoviral,earnmoney,

shapepolicy,solvemeaningfulproblems,andattractallmannerofattention.Instead

offocusingonhowtokeepthesemediatedintersectionsofmultimodaldigitalmedia

andprint-onlylanguageusesfromoccurringinschools,weshouldbeactivelyinvite

theminby“creatingschooldiscoursethatisnotseparateanddistinctfromthe


blurreddiscoursesofourlivesoutsideofschool”(Alvermann&Hagood,2000,p.

203).Whenwekeepthedoorsopentothepossibilitiesofdigitalmediaandliteracy,

wecreateopportunitiesforalltobevaluedinandoutofschool,bothnowandinthe

future.

Wecontinuetoseethat“youngpeoplearetirelesslyeditingandremixing

multimodalcontenttheyfindonlinetosharewithothers,usingnewtoolstoshow

andtell,andrewritingtheirsocialidentitiesinanefforttobecomewhotheysay

theyare”(Alvermann,2008,p.8).Inotherwords,today’sstudents’literacy

practicesarebothnarrativeaswellasconnectiveespeciallyasthesetextsbecome

moresocial.

Forthisreason,thesocialnatureofliteracypracticestodaygivesallofusa

newwaytothinkandconnectwiththosearoundus.Infact,literacyisnotjust

limitedtothe“local”realmeither,suchastheclassroom.Literacyinfiltrates,

disjoints,anddisplaceslocallife(BrandtandClinton,2002,p.343).Itisneverjust

thelocalimpactingliteracypractices,butinsteadthetransactionthattakesplace

withinthatmoment:theconsumptionandproductionofmediawiththetoolsto

disseminate“new”informationina“new”waycreatedbytheconsumer,which

invitesnewliteracyformsthatessentiallyconnecteveryoneeverywhere.

However,whatdothesenewliteracyformsmeaninregardstotoday’s

classrooms?Becauseweareplacedinsocialsituationsthat“callforcritical

approachesthatmakeusawareofhow[the]mediaconstructmeanings,influence

andeducateaudiences,andimposetheirmessagesandvalues”(Kellner&Share,

2007,p.8),weneedtohelpstudentsmovepasttheobviousmeaningsandworkon


adeeperlevelwiththetextsinfrontofthem.And,becausethesemediated,“new”

textsareconstantlychanginginform,itisimportantforthemtounderstandwhy

andhowthosechangesarebeingmade,includinghowdifferentformatsimpactour

readingofthosetexts.

Typically,the“criticalcomponentofmedialiteracymusttransformliteracy

educationintoanexplorationoftheroleoflanguageandcommunicationmediain

ordertodefinerelationshipsofpoweranddominationthatareultimatelydeeply

embeddedinideologicalnotions”(Kellner&Share,2000,p.8).Forthisreason,

studentsneedtoseehowauthorsofmultimodalmessagesareconsuming(including

billboards,musicvideos,newspaperarticles,andnovelstonameafew)and

positioningthemasconsumerswithmanymediatedmessages.

Inaddition,byhelpingstudentstounderstandhowtheyarealreadybeing

positionedintherealworldbytheircriticalproductions(e.g.blogposts,tweets,

lyricalraps),wecanhelpmanystudentsseeconnectionsbetweentheirinandoutof

schoolliteracypractices.“Weliveinandmoveinamaterialworld;thethingsinit--

objects,visualrepresentations,machines,andtools—takepartinourdramasof

meaningsaswell”(Gee,2012,p.185).Thus,students“dramasofmeanings”are

createdinallthattheydo;yet,theneedtohelpthemnavigatethosemany

connectionsandmeaningscontinuestobecriticalsincetheyarealreadyconsuming,

producing,andsharingdigitalmediaontheirown.

CivicEngagement

Theproductionofnewsocialspacesengendersnewformsandavenuesof

civicengagement.Numerouslarge-scalesocialmovementsoneverycontinent


underscoretheroleofsocialmediainlandmarksocialprotests.Partofeducating

students,then,ishelpingthemunderstandhowtomanipulatedigitalmedia,

throughwhichtheymaybeworkingonadailybasis,toservecivicengagement

purposes.

Jones(2011)emphasizesthefactthatthesecommunicationspaces,orsites

ofdisplay,become“socialoccasionsinwhichparticularconfigurationsofmodesand

mediacoverageinaparticulartimeandspaceinordertomakeparticularsocial

actionspossible”(p.114).Ofcourse,“theproblemwithexaminingsitesofdisplay

outsideofthecontextoftheiruseby‘watchers’toperformparticularsocial

practicesisthatwhatpeoplecandowithdifferentsitesofdisplayaltersradicallyin

differentcontexts”(Jones,2011,p.114).Thus,everysiteofdisplay,orcomposition

space,changesdependingonwhoisviewingit,fromwhatangleitisbeingviewed,

andhowitispositionedandembeddedwithinothersitesofdisplaysbeforeitmay

berepurposedwithinthedigitalsphere.

Inotherwords,sitesofdisplaysarewherethereader/vieweractively

participatesandmakesmeaningoftheconstructedtext,emphasizingasymbiotic

relationshipbetweensocialpracticesanditself(Jones,2011,p.116).Becausesites

ofdisplayinvolvesocialpractices,theydobecomeaformofsocialinteraction,

wheretheviewercanbecomeapartoftheactionbycreatingherorhisown

meanings,andsocialidentity/identitiesaswell.

Whenwethinkabouttheattentioneconomyandschoolsassitesofdisplay,

werecognizetherestrictivenormsforlanguageusethatrepresenttheantithesisof

theflexiblestanceneededforcivicengagement.Languageusewithinschools


traditionallyfocusesonwhatisdeemedasa“success”(suchaswritingafive

paragraphpersuasiveessay)versuswhatisdeemedasa“failure”(suchasdevaluing

thatsameessaycreatedthroughavideonarrative).Ifschoolsdevaluestudents’

languagebyrestrictingthemfromcreatingandsharinginformationinmeaningful

ways,thenstudents’attentionwillbespentonwhatmatterstothemandwhatgives

themthemostsocialcapital,orpower,withinsociety.Thus,it’snotaboutthe

highestscoreonatest;it’sabouthowmanynewfollowersonegetsonTwitter

thankstoastrategictweetatjusttherighttime,forexample.

Withincontemporarysociety,weallnavigateatext-mediatedworldinwhich

time,space,identity,andmeaningsareintricatelyconnected.Byusingthese

componentsastools,wecancreatedigitaltextsthataccommodatetheamountof

timewehavewhilemovingfromoneplacetoanotherandsharingwithinapublicor

privatedigitalspace.Forthisreason,itisincreasinglyimportanttounderstandthat

“meaningsaremadeacrosstime,acrossspace,inandthroughmatter”(Lemke,

2011,p.143).However,aseducatorsandresearchers,wecannotbeafraidofthis

mediatedworldandmustfocusonworkingtowardsacommongoalofconsidering

howbothlocalandglobalcivicengagementsareimpactedbythesemediated

meanings.

“Grassrootssocialmovements,nongovernmentalorganizations(NGOs),

scientists,activists,governments,andsomebusinessesresistIP[intellectual

property]witharangeoftactics,bothinsideandoutsidethepolicyworld,inlocal,

national,andinternationalvenues”(Schweidler&Costanza-Chock,in-press,p.4).

Regardingdigitalmedia,thispointsuggeststhatmeaningsandknowledgeare


privilegedandguardedcloselybythoseorganizations/powersincharge.Yet,ifour

goalistounlockthepotentialofdigitalmedia,wemustworktowardswaysofusing

whatwelearnfromsocialpracticesthathavethepotentialtoinformpolicy.

SocialPractice

Studiesthatfocusondigitallymediatedactionsin21stcenturylearning

environments(whetherformalorinformal)shareacommoncharacteristic:

“irreducibletensionbetweenculturaltools,ontheonehand,andagents’activeuses

ofthem,ontheother”(Wertsch,1998,pp.518-525).Thisisthecaseevenwhen

toolsareredefinedtoreflectLatour’s(2007)thinkingonhumanandnonhuman

actants.Regardlessofwhetherthoseactionsaresociallydistributedordirectedat

individuals,digitalmediacontentanditspotentialforhelpingpeopleandthings

makeconnectionsareattheheartofwhatcurrentlycountsassocialandeducational

scholarshipinthedigitalrealm.

Witheachpassingyearforthelasttwodecades,networkeddigitalmedia

technologieshaveensuredthatsocialpracticesassociatedwithonlineproduction,

distribution,andconsumptionarepartiallydependentonone’saudience—whether

approvingorevendisapprovingaudiences(deCastell&Jenson,2004).Thisfactor,

plusagrowingawarenessinthefieldofeducationthatitisthequalityratherthan

thequantityofattentionthatmatters,haveinfluencedthedirectionofIanO’Byrne

andGregMcVerry’s(inpress)workwithadolescentswhocollaborateascuratorsof

otherpeople’sworkintheprocessofconstructingtheirownonlinetexts,manyof

whichareremixes.Instudyingyoungpeople’ssocialpracticesaroundremixed

texts,forexample,O’ByrneandMcVerryfoundconsistentevidenceinsupportof


contemporary’syouth’smovementawayfromindividualisticconsumptionof

commerciallypreparedtextstowardanethosofcollaborationinproducingtheir

ownsociallyconstructedtexts.Despitethisencouragingmove,O’Byrne(2014)

reportedageneraldisregardamongyouthforapplyingcriticalliteracyskillsaspart

oftheirsocialpractices.Lookingforunderlyingassumptionsinstudent-produced

textswasneithersociallydistributednorindividuallyappliedintheirworkas

curators.

LikeO’Byrne,MellineeLesley(2012)foundsimilardisregardforsocial

practicesthatinvolvedcriticalthinking.Inherstudy,technicallysavvyadolescent

girlwritersdidnotautomaticallyapplytheirknowledgeandexperiencesinways

thatreflectedsophisticatedcriticalthinkingskills.Forthegirlstobeabletoapply

thoseskills,Lesleyargued,itwouldrequireateacher’sinvestmentininstructionon

howtoframecriticalliteracyinsociallyrelevantspacesthatfosteredonlinetext

production,distribution,andconsumption.Moreover,Lesleycontended,withouta

criticalframingofsuchtexts,thegirlsinherthree-yearethnographywerelikelyto

finditdifficult,ifnotimpossible,toresistthedominantideologiescomingatthem

onallsides.Succumbingtoalossofvoiceorpersonalagencyonthepartofher

participantsinInvisibleGirlswasnotafindingthatLesleyviewedashelpfuloreven

tolerable.

ThisdualsetofmixedfindingsisnotsurprisinggivenWertsch’s(1998)

earlierobservationthatperennialtensionsbetweentoolavailabilityandtooluse

mediatewhatissociallypracticed.AlthoughWertschwasnotreferringspecifically

todigitallymediatedtools,hisobservationisevenmorecogenttoday.The


proliferationofdigitaltoolsandthetechnicalwherewithalforsharingthemmakeit

evenmorelikelythatcontentandconnectionareirrefutablywrappedupwithone

another—sometimesasinthecaseofmemeswithonlynanosecondsseparating

theirproduction,distribution,andconsumption.

Policy

Privileginglanguageoverothermodesofcommunicationiscommonin

educationaswellasincivicandsocialpracticesinwhichdigitalmediaplaysarole,

atleastinpartbecauseofcenturiesofprintpublishers’carefulmanagementof

intellectualpropertyrights.Astechnologyhasmadeothermodesofcommunication

asreplicableandabletobedistributedasprint,concomitantexpansionofdigital

mediaanditseconomicsignificancehasmajorramificationsforpolicy.Vastnational

andinternationaleconomiespossessinertiathatdigitaldevelopment,education,

andintellectualpropertypolicymustbalanceagainsttheneedtopreparefor

uncertainbutcertainlydifferenteconomicfutures.Thedecadeofeconomicengines

“toobigtofail”andeducationalreformeffortsthatthwarttheirownmission(Au,

2011)soundsombernotesforUSandinternationalpolicymakers.

Effortswithinindustrytopromoteforwardthinkingintermsofliteracy

educationhavegainedconsiderablecredibility(e.g.,Partnershipfor21stcentury

skills),buttheunderlyingeconomicnarrativesarelosthereandthereinpatriotic

andaltruisticabstractions.Ontheotherhand,therealpotentialforlearningand

doingthroughacquisitionofliteraciesindigitalmediaenvironmentshaslocal

economicimportancebeyondpreparinganation’sworkforceorendingpoverty.


BuildingonLanham’s(2001)workthatcritiquedthelinguisticbiasin

traditionaltextproduction,deCastellandJensonconcluded“...newmultimodal

technologiesofrepresentation…actuallyconsolidate,extend,andimproveupon

[one’s]literatecapabilities”(p.392).Yetwhohasaccesstothesetechnologiesisa

perennialissueforsocialjusticeresearchersintheirattempttoinfluencepolicy

makers.Digitalmedia’sroleininfluencinghowcontentisdistributedviathe

marketingofsocialcapitalthroughclicks,likes,views,followers,andshares

(Terranova,2012)isnotinconsequential.

Asdiscussedearlier,theroleofdigitalmediacontentisreflectedinthespeed

withwhichmemes(images,videos,soundeffects,songsandthelike)arespread

rapidlybyInternetusers,andtypicallywithoutregardforwhethermessageisclear

ornot.Thisphenomenon,coupledwiththebreakdownofdistinctionsbetween

real-worldandvirtualexperiences,whichVoithofer(2005)calledattentionto

nearlyadecadeago,areassociatedwiththehuman-computerinterfacethatmostof

us(includingpolicymakers)takeforgrantedtoday.However,moremundane

observations(mundane,thatis,topeopleoutsidethefieldofeducation)arethose

thatstakeoutafutureforresearchersenteringtheprofessions10or15years

hence.Whatdowemeanbythis?Here,we’rereferringtoaPewInternetReport

publishedin2012thatconcludedformostteachersandstudentsalike,“research”

means“Googling”orrelyingonWikipediafortheirinformation.Reactingtothis

observation,someteachersweknow(aswellasthoseparticipatinginthePew

Report)admitthatfortheirstudents“doingresearch”hasshiftedfromarelatively

slowprocessrequiringvariouslevelsofinquirytoa“hurry-and-get-it-over”one-


stepprocessthatconsistsofselectingbare-minimuminformationtocompletean

assignment.Whetherthoseinpolicy-makingpositionsareawareofthis

developmentisupforspeculation.

Beyondthespeedandsuperficialprocessingofinformationtodayisan

ongoingdiscussionintheacademy“aboutthenatureoftheparticipatory

democraticutopiaandparticipatorycultureandhowgroupstake(ordonottake)

advantageoftheaffordancesnewandemergingmedia”(Jenkins&Carpentier,2013,

p.265).Inthearticlecitedhere,mediacriticHenryJenkinsconcedesthathehas

contributedtotheutopiannatureofparticipatoryculturebyfailingtomake

distinctionsbetweendescriptiveandnormativelanguagesuchthatalltoooftenwe

areluredintobelievingourparticipationissomethingmorethansuperficial—

somethingthatcanleadtoourempowerment,whenitcannotbecausethegroups

whoareincontrolof“thatsomething”arenotabouttorelinquishtheirpowerover

it.Endingonamorepositivenote,however,wewouldcallattentiontoMichael

Dezuanni’s(2014)four-yearstudyinaprimaryschoolinQueensland,Australia.

Dezuanni,whoisaSeniorLecturerofFilmandMediaCurriculumintheFacultyat

QueenslandUniversityofTechnology,usesLatour’s(2007)actor-networktheoryto

focusonyounglearners’materialpracticesandhowthosedevelopedovertime.

Dezuanni’sbuilding-blockmetaphorcaptureshowthechildrenhestudieddeployed

technologyandmediaconceptstomateriallyparticipateindigitalculture.

Insummary,digitalmedia’seconomicimpactisabitlikewinningthelottery.

Therearemanychangesthatareeasilyanticipated.Onecancounthowmany

relationsaskforacut,howmucheachoneexpects.However,there’sreallynoway


toquantifyfarmoreimportantandeconomicallysignificantshifts.Peoplerelate

differently.Everydayactionstakeoneconomicsignificanceinwaysthatmayonlybe

recognizedinhindsight.

Inourchapter,wehavesteeredawayfromthehundredsofstudies

commissionedandcarriedoutaroundtheworldthatcountedupthemoneythat

changedhandsasaresultofdigitalmedia,theincreasedtaxrevenuecollectedasa

resultofbroadbandpenetrationinaregion,andthepercapitaincomecomparisons

betweentechnologicalhavesandhavenots.Instead,wehaveattemptedtolisten

andunderstandtheeconomicsofdigitalmediainawaythatprovokesmuchneeded

conversationamongresearchers.

Toooften,economicquestionsareboileddowntoofaraswequestion

whethersomeenterprisesareworththerisk.Thestakesarefartoohigh—andthe

changestoeducation,policy,civicengagement,andsocialpracticetoofar

reaching—merelytoratedigitalmedia’sgainsandlosses.Instead,twooutcomesare

mostneeded:first,thatwethinkaboutwearedoingtoourselvesbymeansofdigital

media;andsecond,webegintoinquireintotheeconomicmeaningofthe

convenienceswelove,thechallengesweendure,andthediscoverieswemake.


References

Alvermann,D.E.(2008).Whybothertheorizingaboutadolescents’onlineliteraciesforclassroompracticeandresearch?JournalofAdolescent&AdultLiteracy,52(1),10.

Alvermann,D.E.(Ed.).(2010).Adolescents’onlineliteracies:Connectingclassrooms, digitalmedia,&popularculture.NewYork,NY:PeterLang.

Alvermann,D.E.(2011).Movingon,keepingpace:Youth’sliterateidentitiesand

multimodaldigitaltexts.InS.Abrams&J.Rowsell(Eds.),Rethinkingidentityandliteracyeducationinthe21stcentury.NationalSocietyfortheStudyofEducationYearbook(vol.110,partI,pp.109-128).NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversity,TeachersCollege.

Alvermann,D.E.,Beach,C.L.,&Johnson,J.(2014).Becoming3lectric.Retrievedfrom www.becoming3lectric.comAlvermann,D.E.,&Hagood,M.C.(2000).Criticalmedialiteracy:Research,

theory,andpracticein‘newtimes.’”TheJournalofEducationalResearch,93(3),193-205.

Au,W.(2011).TeachingunderthenewTaylorism:high-stakestestingandthe

standardizationofthe21stcenturycurriculum.JournalofCurriculumStudies,43(1),25-45.Retrievedfromhttp://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00220272.2010.521261#preview

Aufderheide,P.,&Jaszi,P.(2008).Recut,reframe,recycle:Quotingcopyrighted

materialinuser-generatedvideo.Washington,DC:AmericanUniversity,CenterforSocialMedia,SchoolofCommunication.

Barton,D.,Hamilton,M.,&Ivanic,R.(Eds.).(2000).Situatedliteracies:Readingand writingincontext.London:Routledge.Bennett,J.(2010).Vibrantmatter.Durham,NC:DukeUniversityPress.Bigum,C.,Knobel,M.,Lankshear,C.,&Rowan,L.(2003).Literacy,technologyand

theeconomicsofattention.L1–Educationalstudiesinlanguageandliterature,3,95-122.

Braidotti,R.(2013).Theposthuman.Cambridge,UK:Polity.Brandt,D.,&Clinton,K.(2002).Limitsofthelocal:Expandingperspectiveson

literacyasasocialpractice.JournalofLiteracyResearch,34,343.


Carter,P.L.,&Reardon,S.F.(2014,September).Inequalitymatters.(ReportfundedbytheWilliamT.GrantFoundation.PaloAlto,CA:StanfordUniversity.

Chambers,J.(2013).Foreword,inB.Bilbao-Osorio,S.Dutta,&B.lanvin(Eds.)The

globalinformationtechnologyreport,2013,pp.ix-x.Considine,D.,Horton,J.,&Moorman,G.(2009).Teachingandreachingthe

millennialgenerationthroughmedialiteracy.JournalofAdolescentandAdultLiteracy,52,471-2.

Couldry,N.(2012).Media,society,world:Socialtheoryanddigitalmediapractice.

Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.CreativeCommons.(n.d.).Creativecommons.Retrievedfrom

https://creativecommons.org

Dabbagh,N.,&Kitsantas,A.(2012).Personallearningenvironments,socialmedia,andself-regulatedlearning:Anaturalformulaforconnectingformalandinformallearning.TheInternetandHigherEducation,15(1),3-8.

Dawkins,R.(1976).Theselfishgene.NewYork,NY:OxfordUniversityPress.deCastell,S.,&Jenson,J.(2004).Payingattentiontoattention:Neweconomiesfor

learning.EducationalTheory,54(4),381-397.Deleuze,G.,&Guattari,F.(1987).Athousandplateaus.Minneapolis,MN:University

ofMinnesotaPress.Dezuanni,M.(2014).Thebuildingblocksofdigitalmedialiteracy:socio-material

participationandtheproductionofmediaknowledge.JournalofCurriculumStudies.DOI:10.1080/00220272.2014.966152

Dennett,D.(2002).Dangerousmemes.TED.Retrievedfrom

http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_dennett_on_dangerous_memes?language=enFriesen,N.,Gourlay,L.,&Oliver,M.(2014).Scholarshipandliteraciesinadigital

age.ResearchinLearningTechnology,21,nopagenumbersgiven.Gallagher,B.(2014).10sexistmemesweshouldprobablystopusing.Complex.

Retrievedfromhttp://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2014/02/sexist-memes-we-should-probably-stop-using/

Gee,J.P.(1990).Sociallinguisticsandandliteracies:Ideologyindiscourses.London:

Falmer.


Gee,J.P.(2012).Sociallinguisticsandliteracies:Ideologyindiscourses(4thed.).NewYork,NY:Routledge.

Gee,J.P.,Hull,G.,&Lankshear,C.(1996).Thenewworkorder:Behindthelanguageof

thenewcapitalism.Boulder,CO:Westview.Goldhaber,M.H.(1997).Theattentioneconomyandthenet.FirstMonday,2(4).

http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/519/440Guzzetti,B.J.,&Stokrocki,M.(2013).Teachingandlearninginavirtualworld.E-

LearningandDigitalMedia,10(3),242-259.http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/elea.2013.10.3.242

Hall,S.(1973).Encodinganddecodinginthetelevisiondiscourse.Birmingham,UK:

CentreforContemporaryCulturalStudies.Hobbs,R.(2010).Copyrightclarity:Howfairusesupportsdigitallearning.Thousand

Oaks,CA:Corwin.Hull,G.,Stornaiuolo,A.,Sterpont,L.(2013).Imaginedreadersandhospitabletexts:

Globalyouthsconnectonline.InD.E.Alvermann,N.J.Unrau,&R.B.Ruddell(Eds.),Theoreticalmodelsandprocessesofreading:Sixthedition.(pp.1208-1240).Newark,DE:InternationalReadingAssociation.

Ito,M.,Gutiérrez,K.,Livingstone,S.,Penuel,B.,Rhodes,B.,Salen,K.,Schor,J.,Sefton-

Green,J.,&Watkins,S.C.(2013).ConnectedLearning:Anagendaforresearchanddesign.Irvine,CA:DigitalMediaandLearningResearchHub.

Ito,M.,Horst,H.,Bittanti,M.,boyd,d.,Herr-Stephenson,B.,Lange,P.G.,etal.(2008,

November).Livingandlearningwithnewmedia:SummaryoffindingsfromtheDigitalYouthProject.(FundedbyTheJohnD.andCatherineT.MacArthurFoundation).Boston:TheMITPress.

Ivarsson,J.,Linderoth,J.,&Säljö,R.(2011).Representationsinpractices:Asocio-

culturalapproachtomultimodalityinreasoning.InC.Jewitt(Ed.),TheRoutledgehandbookofmultimodalanalysis(pp.201-212).NewYork,NY:Routledge.

Jenkins,H.,&Carpentier,N.(2013).Theorizingparticipatoryintensities:Aconversationaboutparticipationandpolitics.Convergence:TheInternationalJournalofResearchintonewmediatechnologies,19(3)265-286.

Jewitt,C.(2011).Introduction:Handbookrationale,scopeandstructure.InC.Jewitt

(Ed.),TheRoutledgehandbookofmultimodalanalysis(pp.1-7).NewYork,NY:Routledge.


Jocson,K.(2010).Youthwritingacrossmedia:Anoteaboutthewhatandthehow.InS.J.Miller&D.E.Kirkland(Eds.),Changematters:Criticalessaysonmovingsocialjusticeresearchfromtheorytopolicy(pp.77-87).NewYork,NY:PeterLangPublishing,Inc.

Jones,R.H.(2011).Technologyandsitesofdisplay.InC.Jewitt(Ed.),TheRoutledge

handbookofmultimodalanalysis(pp.114-126).NewYork,NY:Routledge.

Kear,K.,Chetwynd,F.,&Jefferis,H.(2014).Socialpresenceinonlinelearningcommunities:Theroleofpersonalprofiles.ResearchinLearningTechnology,22.

Kellner,D.,&Share,J.(2007).Criticalmedialiteracy,democracy,andthe

reconstructionofeducation.InD.Macedo&S.R.Steinberg(Eds.),Medialiteracy:Areader(pp.8).NewYork,NY:PeterLangPublishing,Inc.

Kleine,D.(2010).ICT4What?Usingthechoiceframeworktooperationalisethe

capabilityapproachtodevelopment,ProceedingsoftheIEEE/ACMInternationalConferenceonInformationTechnologyandDevelopment2009(Doha,Qatar),17-19April2009.Retrievedfromhttp://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5426717&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5426717

Kress,G.(1997).Literacy,identityandfutures.Beforewriting:Rethinkingthepaths

toliteracy(pp.1-17).NewYork,NY:Routledge.Kress,G.(2011).Whatismode?InC.Jewitt(Ed.),TheRoutledgehandbookof

multimodalanalysis(pp.54-67).NewYork,NY:Routledge.Lanham,R.A.(2001).What’snextfortext?Education,Communicationand

Information,1(2).http://www.open.ac.uk/eci/lanham/femoset.htmlLatour,B.(2007).Reassemblingthesocial:Anintroductiontoactor-networktheory.

Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.Lemke,J.(2011).Mulimodality,identity,andtime.InC.Jewitt(Ed.),TheRoutledge

handbookofmultimodalanalysis(pp.140-150).NewYork,NY:Routledge.Lesley,M.(2012)Invisiblegirls:Atriskadolescentgirls’writingwithinand beyondschool.NewYork,NY:PeterLang.Leu,D.J.,Kinzer,C.K.,Coiro,J.,Castek,J.,&Henry,L.A.(2013).Newliteracies:Adual-

leveltheoryofthechangingnatureofliteracy,instruction,andassessment.InD.E.Alvermann,N.J.Unrau,&R.B.Ruddell(Eds.),Theoreticalmodelsand


processesofreading:Sixthedition.(pp.1150-1181).Newark,DE:InternationalReadingAssociation.

Lefebvre,H.(1992).Theproductionofspace.NewYork,NY:Wiley-Blackwell.Mansell,R.(2001).Digitalopportunitiesandthemissinglinkfordeveloping

countries.OxfRevEconPolicy,17(2),282-295.Retrievedfromhttp://core.kmi.open.ac.uk/download/pdf/208582.pdf

McClenaghan,D.,&Doecke,B.(2010).Resourcesformeaning-makinginthe

secondaryEnglishclassroom.InD.R.Cole&D.L.Pullen(Eds.),Multiliteraciesinmotion:Currenttheoryandpractice(pp.224-238).NewYork,NY:Routledge.

Meehan,E.R.(2002).Genderingthecommodityaudience:Criticalmediaresearch,

feminism,andpoliticaleconomy.InE.R.Meehan&E.Riordan(Eds.),Sexandmoney:Feminismandpoliticaleconomyinthemedia(pp.209–222).Minneapolis,MN:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.

Miller,V.(2008).Newmedia,networkingandphaticculture.Convergence:The

InternationalJournalofResearchintonewmediatechnologies,14,387-400.O’Byrne,W.I.(2014).Empoweringlearnersinthereader/writernatureofdigital

informationspace.JournalofAdolescent&AdultLiteracy,58(2),102-104.O’Byrne,W.I.,&McVerry,J.G.(inpress).OnlineResearchandMediaSkills:An

instructionalmodeltosupportstudentsastheysearchandsiftonlineinformationaltext.InT.Rasinsky,K.Pytash,&R.Ferdig(Eds).Comprehensionofinformationaltexts.

Orfield,G.(2014).TenthannualBrownlectureineducationresearch:Anewcivil

rightsagendaforAmericaneducation.EducationalResearcher,43,273-292.Pooley,J.(2014,February).InterviewwithNickCouldry.Newbooksinmedia&

communication.Retrievedfromhttp://newbooksincommunications.com/2013/02/04/nick-couldry-media-society-world-social-theory-and-digital-media-practice-polity-press-2012/

Projectoverview.(n.d.).EuropeanaSpaceProject.Retrievedfrom

http://www.europeana-space.euPurcell,K.,Rainie,L.,Heaps,A.,Buchanan,J.,Friedrich,L.,Jacklin,A.,etal.(2012).

Howteensdoresearchinthedigitalworld.PewResearchInternetProject.Retrievedfromhttp://www.pewinternet.org/2012/11/01/how-teens-do-research-in-the-digital-world/


Rennie,J.,&Patterson,A.(2010).YoungAustraliansreadinginadigitalworld.InD.R.Cole&D.L.Pullen(Eds.),Multiliteraciesinmotion:Currenttheoryandpractice(pp.207-223).NewYork,NY:Routledge.

Rushkoff,D.(2014).Presentshock.NewYork,NY:PenguinGroup.Schweidler,C.,&Costanza-Chock,S.(inpress).Commoncause:Global

resistancetointellectualpropertyrights.InD.Kidd,C.Rodriguez,&L.Stein(Eds.),Makingourmedia:Mappingglobalinitiativestowardademocraticpublicsphere.Creskill,NJ:HamptonPress.Retrievedfromhttps://www.academia.edu/8297101/COMMON_CAUSE_GLOBAL_RESISTANCE_TO_INTELLECTUAL_PROPERTY_RIGHTS

Selwyn,N.(2004).Reconsideringpoliticalandpopularunderstandingsofthedigitaldivide.NewMedia&Society,6(3),341-362.Retrievedfromhttp://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~tkennedy/Courses/2P26/Selwyn2004.pdf

Skinner,E.N.,&Hagood,M.C.(2008).DevelopingliterateidentitieswithEnglish

languagelearnersthroughdigitalstorytelling.TheReadingMatrix,8(2),12-38.RetrievedFebruary13,2010,fromhttp://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/skinner_hagood/article.pdf

Smythe,D.W.(2006).Ontheaudiencecommodityanditswork.InDurham,M.G.,&

Kellner,D.M.(Eds.),Mediaandculture:Keyworks(revisededition,pp.230-256).Oxford,UK:BlackwellPublishers.

Street,B.V.(1993).Cross-culturalapproachestoliteracy.Cambridge,UK:Cambridge UniversityPress.Suthersanen,U.(2007).Creativecommons–Theotherway?LearnedPublishing,

20(1),59-68.Terranova,T.(2012).Attention,economyandthebrain.Culturemachine,13,1-19.

http://www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/article/view/465/484Thomas,A.(2007).Youthonline:Identityandliteracyinthedigitalage.NewYork,

NY:PeterLang.Valenza,J.(2008,April1).Fairuseandtransformativeness:Itmayshakeyour

world.SchoolLibraryJournal.RetrievedJanuary25,2015,http://blogs.slj.com/neverendingsearch/2008/04/01/fair-use-and-transformativeness-it-may-shake-your-world/

Varis,P.,&Blommaert,J.(2015).Convivialityandcollectivesonsocialmedia:

Virality,memesandnewsocialstructures.(Paper#108).SpecialissueofJournalofLanguageandPoliticson“theimportanceofunimportantlanguage”


(Blommaert&Varis,eds.2015).RetrievedJanuary25,2015,http://www.tilburguniversity.edu/upload/83490ca9-659d-49a0-97db-ff1f8978062b_TPCS_108_Varis-Blommaert.pdf

Voithofer,R.(2005).Designingnewmediaeducationresearch:Thematerialityof

data,representation,anddissemination.EducationalResearcher,34(9),3–14.Walsh,M.(2008).Worldshavecollidedandmodeshavemerged:Classroom

evidenceofchangedliteracypractices.Literacy,42(2),101-108.Wertsch,J.V.(1998).Mediatedaction.InW.Bechtel&G.Graham(Eds.),Companion

tocognitivescience(pp.518-525).Malden,MA:Blackwell.Wohlwend,K.E.(2008).Playasaliteracyofpossibilities:Expandingmeaningsin

practices,materials,andspaces.LanguageArts,86(2),127-136.Wohlwend,K.E.(2009).Mediateddiscourseanalysis:Researchingyoungchildren’s

non-verbalinteractionsassocialpractice.JournalofEarlyChildhoodResearch,7(3),p.228-243.doi:10.1177/1476718X09336950


DefinitionofTermsActant–atermusedtodenoteanentitywhetherhumanornonhumanthatmodifies

theactionsofanotherentity(e.g.,pouringvinegaronbakingsoda).Transformativeness–thestateofhavingbeenrepurposedbyauserofcopyrighted

materialstomakethemmoreamenabletofairusecriteria.

What does digital media allow us to “do” to one another? Economic significance of content and...

Documents

Transcript of What does digital media allow us to “do” to one another? Economic significance of content and...