Major International Communications Conference to be held in Dublin June 2013

Crises, ‘Creative Destruction’ and the Global Power and Communication Orders

IAMCR 2013 Conference, Dublin City University, Dublin, 25-29 June 2013

The conference theme centres round the concepts of crisis and “creative destruction”, with connotations of historically-rare periods of intensified flux and challenge, accompanied by all-round or multi-dimensional processes of innovation.

Thus, this theme invites reflections and papers addressing whether or how the current deep economic/financial crisis and its attendant gales of “creative destruction” may engender various shifts in the geo-political and communication order. Examples include considerations of whether and how the current crisis may serve to:

.a) Reshape the roles, operations and key features of mediated communication services,institutions and practices, as well as enhancing the role of social media forms and practices;

.b) Amplify tendencies or shifts towards new geo-political configurations, including, including an enhanced role for the communication and cultural industries in the operation of global power and hegemony.

.c) Accelerate change in the nexus of ‘new’ and ‘mature’ media institutions and their associated practices, cultural forms, and and policy frameworks;

.d) Accelerate the search for new and more relevant theories and concepts in the expanding and rapidly diffusing field concerned with the study of mediated communication.

For more information:

http://iamcr2013dublin.com/
Call for papers:

http://iamcr2013dublin.com/call-for-papers

Advertisements

Who represents the users? Jeneen Naji – Digital Media Faculty, NUI Maynooth

Today I watched a video stream of the digital rights forum held at the science gallery, the event was organised and led by Sean Nicholls. The argument for debate made is that the statutory instrument 59/2012 which was signed into law by Richard Bruton, T.D. on 29th February of this year will curtail access to websites and services in Ireland and may represent a real threat to Irish citizens civil rights and free access to the internet by enabling rights holders to seek potentially costly and damaging injunctions against websites as innocuous as Youtube, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Boards.ie and others.


The panelists were Sean Sherlock – Minister for Research & Innovation, Paul Durrant – GM, Internet Service Providers Association of Ireland, Tom Murphy – Director & Founder, Boards.ie, Simon McGarr – McGarr Solicitors, StopSopaIreland. The chair was John F Kennedy – Editor, Silicon Republic.

While all spoke eloquently it emerged very early on that it was Sean and Paul versus Tom and Simon. Simon spent most of the event sitting quietly like a bold child who has been told he could only attend if he behaved. Which is probably what he was told as the minister has initially told the organisers that he would not be attending if Simon McGarr was present on the panel. A position he quickly did a u-turn on once word of this filtered through to the internet (see the journal.ie report here).

The importance and relevance of this debate is indicated in the fact that, as I watched, the numbers of online viewers rose to 596, an impressive number for lunchtime mid week.

Systematic evidence of a technological capability to control and patrol cyberspace effectively has yet to reveal itself. Shutting down individual sites that have been found guilty of copyright infringement such as Napster has not stemmed the flow of online piracy. This is due to the very nature of the Internet, it is a borderless decentralised space and its denizens are extremely fluent in the language of their world and quite attached to its non-centralised nature. This why legislation such as this is being proposed, shifting the responsibility to the internet service providers. Tom Murphy during the debate provided the metaphor of suing those who manage the M50 because someone drove a getaway car down it after a robbery.

The struggle to control the Internet is evident in current debates regarding the Stop Online Piracy Act (S.O.P.A.) and the Protect Intellectual Property Act (P.I.P.A.) in the U.S.A. These acts seek to place the responsibility on Internet Service Providers (I.S.P.s) to ensure their customers do not engage in copyright infringement. As a result I.S.P.s will block access to sites suspected of copyright infringement. The proposed introduction of these acts provoked widespread debate in the U.S.A. Websites such as most notably Wikipedia and Google engaged in digital blackouts on Wednesday January 18th 2012 in protest to the S.O.P.A whereby they “blacked out” some or all of their online services. Critics of the acts say they are too severe and in the wake of widespread protest their proposal to the Senate was delayed in order for them to be redrafted following further consultation with stakeholders.

In Ireland similar legislation was put forward and passed called S.I. No. 337/2011 — European Communities (Electronic Communications Networks and Services) (Universal Service and Users’ Rights) Regulations 2011 or, as it is also known as, S.O.P.A. Ireland. However in Ireland there was no vote on the law, instead it was enacted by ministerial order as it was prepared in the form of a Statutory Instrument. Despite online petitions and protest it was passed as the Irish government was under serious legal pressure regarding copyright infringement from the big four record labels, E.M.I., Sony, Warner, and Universal.

What is clear is that the Irish government ran scared as soon as the American corporate heavies threatened to sue. At that point legislation was hurriedly drawn up and passed without appropriate debate with all stakeholders.

Appropriate Debate?

Tom Murphy shone in the debate at the Science Gallery with informed and well thought out points. He spoke of how during the completely inadequate and rushed consultation process that did take place before the enactment of legislature he asked the question,

“who is representing the users”?

Not only did it seem that the users were underrepresented but it is also worth noting that, despite the fact that it is usually the artist who is quoted as being protected by legislation such as this, there were nonetheless no artists on the debate panel.

Ironically it seems that the minister for research and innovation is very possibly the one person who has damaged potential digital innovation in Ireland the most. The fact remains that legislation such as this is too important to have been rushed, a measured and thoughtful consultation process is required, as opposed to a knee jerk reaction. But the question is, is it too late?

Thoughts on the Political Economy of the Internet – A call to Bloggers, Writers and Activists

Critical Media Review will begin a series where it will gather and collate blogs, articles, thoughts and comments on issues surrounding the great ‘public sphere’ of the twenty-first century – the internet. CMR calls on bloggers, scholars, activists and any interested individuals to send their thoughts, articles and links here.  Short articles and links to already existing work are welcome.  CMR can be reached at criticalmediareview@gmail.com

CMR is interested especially (but not restricted to) the following areas:

The Internet, privacy and the commodification of everything – one reading of the growth of the internet and especially social media is the encroachment of our private lives by capitalism. Now alongside the privatisation of such services as water and power, in recent years  our most intimate private lives, friendships and networks have become mere informational commodities to be recorded, commodified and traded. Moreover our ever connectedness through smart phones and other mobile devices mean we are connected to our workplaces, the markets and advertisers twenty-four hours a day seven days a week. It allows for the dystopia of the surveillance society as predicted by Orwell and Foucault. And finally  is the very success of social networks built upon the commodified free-labour of users themselves?

The internet and open-source as an alternative to capitalism as we know it – the internet its connectivity and its potential for collaborative and co-operative work offers a model to move beyond commodity capitalism.

The internet and the alternative media – the internet offers an unprecedented opportunity to working class and subaltern groups, firstly as it offers a cheap and effective platform for the production and dissemination of alternative views and news; secondly as it offers the possibility of two-way and three-way discussion. It bypasses traditional gatekeeping practices of the mainstream corporate media and even within the working class movement bypasses traditional gatekeeping by party hierarchies (by access to party publications and networks). However is so-called ‘citizen journalism’ a match for the resources and power-structures of the corporate media?

The internet as a site of struggle – As seen in the Arab Spring and in battles over copyright legislation the internet is becoming more and more a site of struggle itself. How will the state react to perceived threats coming from hacker activists and how will users of the internet react to current state policies attempting to bring capitalist laws on copyright to the cyber sphere?

The internet and its relation to the material basethe internet and other communicative networks can be perceived in terms of the base/superstructure as defined by Marx. In a rethinking of the base /superstructure concept what is the relationship between material ‘reality’ and the internet. How does the internet effect the economic and social base in terms of politics and class struggle and indeed how does the material base of class and the relations of production affect the development of the internet itself?