The inflation of much political disputes the transformation of association between public and private life that has helped model the development of modern societies. In the 20th century, there was a concerned debate about the power of the state and market which was overpowering the private life. Gradually in the 21st century, the social problem changed and is seen as the disappearance of public life by the domestic processes of private sphere. The public and private spheres have distinctive clear boundaries, which has been the key formation to the modern imagination and moves to structure practices, discourses and institutions. However, there is significant difference that shows the boundaries are being ‘dislocated’ (Morley 2003), whereby domestic culture has been shaped around public representations and industries. Anna McCarthy argues that: Public spaces are not purely and self-evidently public; they are, like every other cultural space, characterized by particular configurations of public and private. Indeed what makes the public/private division such a major category of social power is the fact that it is dynamic and flexible, varying from place to place. (McCarthy, 2001: 121) In cultural studies, we associate spheres and spaces as a place of character which are distinguished places where publicity and privacy moments occur. This links to the idea that domestic home life is still considered different to the public realm through a variety of discourses that flow to everyday lifestyles. This is because we live in globalised, characterised societies by mobility and ease of access through new digital technologies. However, the availability over mobile subjects may be different to others, as some cannot affo... ... middle of paper ... ...gy and Privacy: The New Landscape. San Diego: MIT Press. 1-21. Arendt, H. (2009). Immigrant Action, and the Space of Appearance. Political Theory. 37 (5), 595-622. Aslama, M (2006). Intellectual Scaffolding: On Peter Darlgren's Theorization of Television and The Public Sphere. New York: Donald McGannon Communication Research Center. 1-31. Hollows, J. (2008). Domestic Cultures. Berkshire: Open University Press. 115- 134. Ling, R (1997). Mobile telephones and The Disturbance of The Public Sphere. 2nd ed. Stockholm: L.Haddon. 1-17. Papastergiadis, N. (2013). Mega Screens for Mega Cities. Theory, Culture & Society. 0 (0), 1-17. Sheller, M and Urry J. (2003). Mobile Transformations of 'Public' and 'Private' Life. Theory, Culture & Society. 20 (3), 107-125. Thompson, J. (2011). Shifting Boundaries of Public and Private Life.Theory, Culture & Society. 28 (4), 49-70.
A common theme is taking place where as people feel that cell phones are starting to take over others daily lives. Many people go through their day to day lives not even relizing how often they are on their cell phones. In the article, “Our Cell Phones, Ourselves” the author Christine Rosen talks about how cell phones are starting to become a necessity in every way towards peoples lives. Rosen talks about both the good and bad effects of cell phones and how they have changed the way in which we work our daily life. Although I think cell phones can be necissary, the constant need for use could be the beginning of how cell phones will take over our every day lives.
Postman bases his argument on the belief that public discourse in America, when governed by the epistemology of the printing press, was "generally coherent, serious, and rational" (16) because the reader was required to ingest, understand, and think about the logic of the author's arguments before coming to a verdict. In effect, intelligence in a print-based world "implies that one can dwell comfortably without pictures, in a field of concepts and generalizations" (26). However, with the emergence of television and its rapid ascendancy in our culture, Postman argues that discourse has become "shriveled and absurd" (16). TV, he says, assaults us with fleeting images and disconnected bits of information with no context except for the "pseudo-context" which is manufactured "to give fragmented and irrelevant information a seeming use" (76). In effect, TV demands a certain kind of content-the "medium is the message" in the words of Marshall McLuhan-that Postman believes is suitable to the world of show business and hostile to the print-based world of logical thinking (80). This is not to say that TV ignores important subjects such as current affairs, politics, religion, science, and e...
In his novel, Amusing Ourselves to Death, Postman describes to the reader, in detail, the immediate and future dangers of television. The argument starts out in a logical manner, explaining first the differences between today's media-driven society, and yesterday's "typographic America". Postman goes on to discuss in the second half of his book the effects of today's media, politics on television, religion on television, and finally televised educational programs. He explains that the media consists of "fragments of news" (Postman, 1985, p.97), and politics are merely a fashion show. Although Postman's arguments regarding the brevity of the American attention span and the importance of today's mass media are logical, I do not agree with his opinion of television's inability to educate.
Shapiro,M., & Lang, A. (1991).Making television reality: Unconscious processes in the construction of social reality. Communication Research, 18, 685–705. doi: 10.1177=009365091018005007
Thomas Nagel. “Personal Rights and Public Space.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 24, no.2 (1995): 83-107.
In the essay “Our Cell Phones, Our Selves” written by Christine Rosen, the author presents a brief history on how cell phones were introduced into society and how this artifact changed people’s interactions in the physical space. Rosen describes the first cell phone that appeared in 1983 as “hardly elegant,” big and expensive (458). Cell phones at that time were mainly used by important and affluent people. However, seven years later, cell phones became smaller and affordable provoking a big change in society. This big technological advance did not only affect the United States, but the entire world.
In a technologically increasing world, individuals find themselves surrounded by devices that are created for the purpose of making daily life easier. One of the most commonly owned devices is the cell phone. The cell phone has the ability to provide almost all the services of various other devices through applications. Ironically, cell phones were created for the purpose of supporting communication at a distance, and cell phones have become a cause of distance in human relationships. Cell phones are enabling disconnection in communication, dependency on technology, and a weakened sense of humanity.
About a month ago I attended a dinner with some close friends. As we all sat in the restaurant waiting for drink orders to be taken, I looked around the table and what I saw made me feel more than a little annoyed considering I had not seen some of these people (or spoken to some of them) in over a month. Everyone at the table had sat down and immediately took out their phone. After reading the article “Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?”, by Jean M. Twenge, the feelings experienced that evening at dinner were validated and broadened by the depth and scope of the article. Jean Twenge was persuasive because of the statistical data in her article.
Society may seek answers to an issue through a medium that most directly cause them. Neil Postman examines this alarming problem in his work of nonfiction Amusing Ourselves to Death, explaining how television challenges public discourse by transfiguring events from our life into a form of entertainment. This very country designates, “...A city entirely...to the idea of entertainment” (Postman 3) which shows the accepting common norm that usually goes disregarded. Postman’s argument circles the idea of a washed out culture who, “...Come to love their oppression” (xix) controlled by television. He juxtaposes two prophecies, Orwell’s, “...Dark vision” (xix) of societies bond to authority and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, where people allow
In the article entitled, “Our Cell Phones Ourselves”, Christine Rosen describes how cell phones have changed the way we communicate. Rosen tells the readers the main purpose for cell phone use in the past, versus present day. Her purpose is to make society aware of how cell phones have influenced our lives in order to inspire change as to how we view our cell phones. Rosen directs her writing to everyone in the present day by describing the negative results of cell phone use and how it impacts our lives and those around us. Without a doubt, cell phones are going to be a part of our world, but it is the responsibility of every cell phone owner to exercise self control and understand that a cell phone is nothing more than a device.
Rippin, Hannah. “The Mobile Phone in Everyday Life.” Fast Capitalism. 2005. Web. 14 Feb, 2014.
Vande Berg, L.R., Wenner, L.A., & Gronbeck, B. E. (1998). Critical Approaches to Television. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Cell phones have changed the atmosphere of our workplaces, making them more escapable physically, yet at the same time making them less escapable mentally. Enhanced with other phone services such as caller ID, call forwarding, and answering machines they have created whole new sets of contacting games between employee's and their co-workers. They have made our roads more dangerous, yet having them in our cars has made it easier to call a tow truck when you're stranded, or to call a radio station to report gridlock. The same person that uses their phone in line at the store to get the advantage over the unreachable employee to gain status at the office, also loses status in the community due to the snickering behind them in line. The recent telecommunications improvements provide an opportunity for the appealing psuedo-self-employed aspects of telecommuting. For parents, cell phones have eliminated the excuses of the late night returning child when asked 'Why didn't you call?" Cell phones have obviously intruded into our lives in more ways than we even realize at first glimpse, while making a great deal of things we do much easier. In this paper I will attempt to expand on how these changing relationships effect our always stressed out society.
Gauntlett, D. Hill, A. BFI (1999) TV Living: Television, Culture, and Everyday Life, p. 263 London: Routledge.
Many studies point out how cell phones have changed our lifestyles dramatically over the years. They’ve become a part of people because as many can’t go anywhere without a cell phone at their side. Cell phones began as just a talking device, but today, one can now call, store contacts, text, email, surf the web and have access to endless apps. Though much has been said about cell phones becoming a huge distraction in today’s society, less attention has been paid to how much cell phones have transformed over the year and the advancements they’ve given us. (Ray)