Subjectivity 2.0: Digital technologies, participatory media and communicative capitalism

Abstract

Drawing on observations and focus group material from pervasive drama project, The Memory Dealer, this article explores both the dynamics and the limitations of existing models of digital subjectivity. It interrogates, in particular, constructions of the digital subject within critical internet studies, focusing on the work of Jodi Dean. This model of subjectivity argues that participatory digital media are a conduit through which the subject is 'captured' and shaped to suit the needs of capital. It is suggested here, however, that framing subjective engagements with technology as inevitably being relations of capture, is dangerous in foreclosing scope for resistance and inter-subjective political action. The article ultimately argues that there is a need to reconceptualise the digital subject away from models of capture and towards a more situated, material analysis of the affordances enabled by subjective entanglements with technology.

Fostering “Digital Subjectivity”: An Investigation of Digital Health Narratives in Norway, the Netherlands and Czechia

“…Digital subjectivity has not been a much-used concept in studies of health and illness, but is known from other fields such as digital culture studies (Goriunova 2019), work on gaming culture (Charles 2009) and the domain of media studies (Giraud 2015). The concept of subjectivity has a long tradition and is central to both sociological and psychological research.…”

“…Lately, subjectivity has been introduced as a theoretical angle to understand individuals' relations to digital tools as well as the potential to expand the limits of the self through "digital prostheses" such as mobile phones or personalised medical devices more in general (Rey and Boesel 2014; see also Lynch and Farrington 2018). In what follows we will mainly draw on conceptualisations based on the work of Rey and Boesel (2014) and Giraud (2015). Rey and Boesel (2014) understand subjectivity as comprised of two equal elements: the body, or an embodied self, and the social conditions of the subject, that is, the historical conditions forming the subjects' social context.…”

“…Through this lens, digital subjectivity is not a restricted version nor does it replace subjectivity; rather it opens up new dimensions to it. Giraud's (2015) approach to "digital subjectivity" stems from critical Internet and media studies. Her approach can be read as a critique of Dean's (2009) somewhat cynical conceptualisation of subjectivity in which users are believed to get trapped in never-ending communicative loops when they go online.…”

Health-Related Decision-Making of People with Thyroid Disease

“…Medical anthropology has investigated how participation in online support groups affects illness identities (Sobo et al, 2016). Less is known about how the decision-making process of health-seeking subjects is shaped by online discourse and how this might affect health-related subjectivities (Giraud, 2015;Ortner, 2005) for chronic conditions.…”

The Manufacture of Disconnection

“…It is these relational and affective dimensions to social media that can make disconnection difficult, as meaningful bonds are generated and managed by social media platforms (Carlquist, Prøitz, and Roen 2019;Karppi 2018). If elements of subjectivity are circulated throughout social media and networks (Giraud 2015) such as the users' capacity to be affected, care and feel a sense of belonging for others, it is not surprising that some users may not want to disconnect at all. The affective dimensions of managing connections are arguably even more pertinent when affects and a sense of belonging are amplified by platforms that are powered by algorithmic circuits (Wark 2019) and political economies (Dean 2005) beyond the user's purview.…”