Framing of computers into existing value system in society
For this week's assignment for the course New media and society I've read Jean P. Kelly's article: Not so revolutionary after all: the role of reinforcing frames in US magazine discourse about microcomputers. And it impressed me, or at least got me to thinking about it even after I've finished it.
In his article Kelly investigates the role of media discourse in the process by which the personal computer became common trusted technology in the USA from 1980s to 1990s. He systematically analyzed media content about computers from that period and came to conclusions that the most often frames, which were used to describe computers were TOOL and LITERACY frames .
When computers are presented within the TOOL frame, their efficiency, productivity, speed and business functions are emphasized. And when the computers are presented within the LITERACY frame, the computer mastery is presented as a skill, which is needed for academic and career success. What Kelly is trying to say is that such interpretation of the computers is typical for the capitalist societies, where work, profit and efficiency are much respected values.
The meanings, ideas and values that were ascribed to the potentially revolutionary device came from the existing social and cultural relations. In his article, Kelly explains how the particular values and characteristics inherent in existing power relations were associated with an object (the computer) in order to promote its acceptance, and how this in turn sustained these existing power relations rather than challenging them
The framing of I PAD
After reading Kelly’s article I tried to think of some new media technology that was recently introduced for the first time and how it was presented. I immediately thought of the Apple’s I-PAD, which is still something new (there is still some uncertainty about the device, its use and impact). I decided to find the introductory commercial for the I Pod and make a quick analysis, based on Kelly’s ideas.
As you can see, the answer to the question “What is I-PAD?” is directly offered in the video, as much as through the direct descriptions of its characteristics as through the visual representation.
The conclusions can be more or less drawn from Kelly’s findings about early representations of computers. The tool frame is also used for describing the I PAD (it’s thin, it goes anywhere and lasts all day, it’s crazy powerful, it’s 200 000 aps and counting, all the world’s websites in your hands). Even the visual representation uses the tool frame to emphasize its convenience and versatility (we can see different people using the I-Pad when sitting on the stairs, when in a café, when on train, carrying I-pod when walking, riding on motorcycle, using it for the navigation, for business…). The sentences “and you already know how to use it” and “it’s already a revolution” are somewhat contradictory, but they to exactly what Kelly notices in his article: they frame the new, unknown device as something revolutionary, which will change consumer’s life, but at the same time they comfort him that it is not so new and different that he wouldn’t be able to use it. In the commercial we can also notice some references to the existing values in our society, such as family (we can see a woman, who is reading a “book” on I-pad to a child and someone who is browsing photos of children on the I-pad).
So the I-PAD in this introductory commercial is actualy framed in the same way as the computer was, when it was first introduced in the market. This is of course not suprising, considering the fact that as Kelly says, frames are influenced by the values of society. And capitalsim is still some kind of a "general frame" of our society.
For this week's assignment for the course New media and society I've read Jean P. Kelly's article: Not so revolutionary after all: the role of reinforcing frames in US magazine discourse about microcomputers. And it impressed me, or at least got me to thinking about it even after I've finished it.
In his article Kelly investigates the role of media discourse in the process by which the personal computer became common trusted technology in the USA from 1980s to 1990s. He systematically analyzed media content about computers from that period and came to conclusions that the most often frames, which were used to describe computers were TOOL and LITERACY frames .
When computers are presented within the TOOL frame, their efficiency, productivity, speed and business functions are emphasized. And when the computers are presented within the LITERACY frame, the computer mastery is presented as a skill, which is needed for academic and career success. What Kelly is trying to say is that such interpretation of the computers is typical for the capitalist societies, where work, profit and efficiency are much respected values.
The meanings, ideas and values that were ascribed to the potentially revolutionary device came from the existing social and cultural relations. In his article, Kelly explains how the particular values and characteristics inherent in existing power relations were associated with an object (the computer) in order to promote its acceptance, and how this in turn sustained these existing power relations rather than challenging them
The framing of I PAD
After reading Kelly’s article I tried to think of some new media technology that was recently introduced for the first time and how it was presented. I immediately thought of the Apple’s I-PAD, which is still something new (there is still some uncertainty about the device, its use and impact). I decided to find the introductory commercial for the I Pod and make a quick analysis, based on Kelly’s ideas.
As you can see, the answer to the question “What is I-PAD?” is directly offered in the video, as much as through the direct descriptions of its characteristics as through the visual representation.
The conclusions can be more or less drawn from Kelly’s findings about early representations of computers. The tool frame is also used for describing the I PAD (it’s thin, it goes anywhere and lasts all day, it’s crazy powerful, it’s 200 000 aps and counting, all the world’s websites in your hands). Even the visual representation uses the tool frame to emphasize its convenience and versatility (we can see different people using the I-Pad when sitting on the stairs, when in a café, when on train, carrying I-pod when walking, riding on motorcycle, using it for the navigation, for business…). The sentences “and you already know how to use it” and “it’s already a revolution” are somewhat contradictory, but they to exactly what Kelly notices in his article: they frame the new, unknown device as something revolutionary, which will change consumer’s life, but at the same time they comfort him that it is not so new and different that he wouldn’t be able to use it. In the commercial we can also notice some references to the existing values in our society, such as family (we can see a woman, who is reading a “book” on I-pad to a child and someone who is browsing photos of children on the I-pad).
So the I-PAD in this introductory commercial is actualy framed in the same way as the computer was, when it was first introduced in the market. This is of course not suprising, considering the fact that as Kelly says, frames are influenced by the values of society. And capitalsim is still some kind of a "general frame" of our society.
Ni komentarjev:
Objavite komentar