Toward a Theory of Atypical Media Work and Social Hope

Abstract

Most media work today takes place under atypical conditions, i.e. media professionals such as journalists, musicians, filmmakers, advertising creatives and game developers generally work without open-ended contracts. In this essay, a theory of atypical media work is outlined highlighting this way of working and being at work from the current culture of capitalism. Further, it also throws light on how dualisms, dominating the discourse on media work – such as contracted versus freelance labour, primary and secondary sector employment, good versus bad jobs, paid versus unpaid work – are not as useful as they seem to be is shown. It also delves into the different ways of making precarity, precariousness, constrained autonomy and lack of agency and highlights themas the key problematic features of atypical work – productive (beyond productivity narratives). Throughout the argument, the reasons and motivations for (doing and studying) atypical media work are articulated with a distinct sense of shared social hope.

Mobilising networks after redundancy: The experiences of Australian journalists

“…Building on the work of Antcliff et al (2007), this reaffirms the need to consider how people engage with their networks over time and for varying purposes. It also provides empirical insights into the argument of Deuze et al (2020) that precarity and precariousness provide an opportunity 'to imagine other ways of working and being at work' (p. 17). In this regard, our findings relating to super-networkers provide an important contribution to the literature, showing how people over time engage with and mobilise their networks for multiple purposes (Antcliff et al, 2007;Granovetter, 1973).…”

“…The article also demonstrates that it is vital to consider networks, and the strong and weak ties that constitute those networks, in the broader industry context, which in this case is a segment of a media industry, namely journalism, where precarity is now a defining feature (Deuze & Marjoribanks, 2009;Deuze et al, 2020;O'Donnell et al, 2016). The industry context of precarity, particularly notable in Australian journalism from 2012 onwards, has a profound impact on the purpose of the networks and also on the ways in which journalists seek to exert agency.…”

“…As Deuze et al (2020) have noted, '[t]he most consistent theme running through the literature in studies of (atypical) media work is precariousness and precarity' (p. 12). They argue that precarity can be understood as an outcome of combined changes in the labour market and in the role of the welfare state.…”

“…While much research focuses appropriately on the negative features and outcomes of precarious work, Deuze et al (2020) suggest that it is important also to analyse how workers seek to exercise agency individually and collectively in specific contexts of precarity. Such analyses of how workers strategise and mobilise when faced with precarity and precariousness can in turn provide insights into how it is possible 'to imagine other ways of working and being at work' (Deuze et al, 2020: 17. See also, Geldens & Marjoribanks, 2015.…”

“…Given the downturn in employment in legacy media, and ongoing disruptions to the industry, both of which are contributing to the increasing precariousness of journalism, it is unlikely that networks will facilitate large scale re-entry into legacy media employment (Cohen, 2015). Where networks may be valuable, however, is in presenting opportunities for employment in new contexts, whether that be in digital media or other related employment such as public relations, and in new forms, such as part-time and temporary work, as well as in providing support beyond immediate employment (Deuze et al, 2020;McKee-Ryan et al, 2005). In another relevant contribution to this discussion, focused on freelancers and networks in the UK television industry, Antcliff et al (2007) find that 'individuals use networks to fulfil multiple and diverse functions' (p. 373), and that it is critical to analyse how individuals 'navigate different types of networks' (p. 388) to understand how people engage with their environment.…”