New Media Essay—Sociology (is new media beneficial to society?
Neophiliacs may argue that the digitalisation of new media has been beneficial because it allows
greater economic growth (item n) of online businesses all over the world. This is an important
advantage because with the impact of globalisation, companies all over the world can work together
and connect without the physical borders restraining their communication. In addition, the
interconnectedness could benefit smaller companies, allowing them to grow. This idea can be
supported by the sociologist Socha in 2014, who argued that the new media the helpful to support
the process of electronic commerce, by making it quicker and easier to buy goods online. For
example, Amazon is an online shop all over the world, selling all kinds of products that someone
would need with quick delivery (often next day). This has led to its success of a value of 1.7 trillion
dollars, with more people going onto the amazon website instead of going to find the products they
need in multiple shops. This means that when a business can be accessed online, it becomes more
efficient, earning more profit because they don’t have to pay extra fees for things such as physical
shops. Furthermore, functionalists may agree with the neophiliac viewpoint because with companies
becoming connected, and smaller businesses being accessed all over the world, it creates an ordered
society. This is where the majority are in consensus about online shopping being useful in society
today. However, the idea that new media allows economic growth can be criticised by Marxists for
only benefiting the growth of the ruling classes to maintain their power in society (n). This can be
seen from the example of Amazon, it is one of the biggest companies formally run by Jeff Bezos (a
billionaire) and it is seen all over the world, so there is a big influence, and they remain in power
because individuals rely on them. On the other hand, due to the digital divide, the digital have-nots
(w/c) cannot access or have the knowledge in order to get their views across or promote their
businesses, so the ruling classes remain in power. Therefore, new media cannot be beneficial to
society as a whole, only to the dominant class who have the means and the power to become
successful.
However, the cultural pessimists argue that new media technologies are harmful to society because
global companies use surveillance to advertise products to us, so we are not fully free individuals.
Cultural pessimists are critical about the new media and all the ideas that the neophiliacs brought up
in the previous point. This theory argues that there are negatives of commercialisation of the
internet, including the idea that many companies that sell products and services on the internet
engage in consumer surveillance. For example, cookies on websites can monitor and process the
data generated by interactive media usage so they can target potential future audiences and
increase their profits. To support this, a Harvard professor, Zuboff explored the rise of digital
technology and its implications for society and came up with surveillance capitalism. This is using
media technology to monitor people’s movements and behaviours online and in the physical world
for the sole purpose of making profits. For example, Zuboff explained that CCTV cameras track
behaviours and emotions of individuals during the day and sell of the data to show companies when
the best times to sell their products are and who they should target. This suggests that we never
really have any free will over our decisions because they are always made for us based on our
behaviour in the real world and online. This can be criticised because cultural pessimists and Zuboff
assume that people don’t rationally sell their data to companies. For example, if someone wanted to
use Facebook to stay in touch with family members, they may voluntarily hand over their personal
information to Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg.
Neophiliacs may argue that the digitalisation of new media has been beneficial because it allows
greater economic growth (item n) of online businesses all over the world. This is an important
advantage because with the impact of globalisation, companies all over the world can work together
and connect without the physical borders restraining their communication. In addition, the
interconnectedness could benefit smaller companies, allowing them to grow. This idea can be
supported by the sociologist Socha in 2014, who argued that the new media the helpful to support
the process of electronic commerce, by making it quicker and easier to buy goods online. For
example, Amazon is an online shop all over the world, selling all kinds of products that someone
would need with quick delivery (often next day). This has led to its success of a value of 1.7 trillion
dollars, with more people going onto the amazon website instead of going to find the products they
need in multiple shops. This means that when a business can be accessed online, it becomes more
efficient, earning more profit because they don’t have to pay extra fees for things such as physical
shops. Furthermore, functionalists may agree with the neophiliac viewpoint because with companies
becoming connected, and smaller businesses being accessed all over the world, it creates an ordered
society. This is where the majority are in consensus about online shopping being useful in society
today. However, the idea that new media allows economic growth can be criticised by Marxists for
only benefiting the growth of the ruling classes to maintain their power in society (n). This can be
seen from the example of Amazon, it is one of the biggest companies formally run by Jeff Bezos (a
billionaire) and it is seen all over the world, so there is a big influence, and they remain in power
because individuals rely on them. On the other hand, due to the digital divide, the digital have-nots
(w/c) cannot access or have the knowledge in order to get their views across or promote their
businesses, so the ruling classes remain in power. Therefore, new media cannot be beneficial to
society as a whole, only to the dominant class who have the means and the power to become
successful.
However, the cultural pessimists argue that new media technologies are harmful to society because
global companies use surveillance to advertise products to us, so we are not fully free individuals.
Cultural pessimists are critical about the new media and all the ideas that the neophiliacs brought up
in the previous point. This theory argues that there are negatives of commercialisation of the
internet, including the idea that many companies that sell products and services on the internet
engage in consumer surveillance. For example, cookies on websites can monitor and process the
data generated by interactive media usage so they can target potential future audiences and
increase their profits. To support this, a Harvard professor, Zuboff explored the rise of digital
technology and its implications for society and came up with surveillance capitalism. This is using
media technology to monitor people’s movements and behaviours online and in the physical world
for the sole purpose of making profits. For example, Zuboff explained that CCTV cameras track
behaviours and emotions of individuals during the day and sell of the data to show companies when
the best times to sell their products are and who they should target. This suggests that we never
really have any free will over our decisions because they are always made for us based on our
behaviour in the real world and online. This can be criticised because cultural pessimists and Zuboff
assume that people don’t rationally sell their data to companies. For example, if someone wanted to
use Facebook to stay in touch with family members, they may voluntarily hand over their personal
information to Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg.
