Mengxiao Zhu's Seminar Blog

Today's Question:
Miller & Slater have elaborated four cross-cutting, non-exhaustive "dimensions" or "dynamics" that mark the Trinidadian Internet, and perhaps the Internet everywhere. Choose one of the four dynamics introduced in chapter 1 (Objectification, Mediation, Normative Freedom, Positioning) or a sub-concept within one of the dynamics (expansive realization, expansive potential). Analyze how the dynamic manifests in the ethnographic material presented in chapter 3 (Relationships) or chapter 4 (Being Trini). You might consider: What does the dynamic mean? How is the dynamic analytically useful? How is it applied? How is its use related to the method employed here, or the assumptions?

My Response:
I have to say I was one of the people who were ignorant about Trinidad as a country. When I first read this word in this book as well as when I heard it mentioned in class, I had thought it was some kind of rhetorical place and not a real place… :-(
In the first chapter of the book, authors gave the conclusion of the whole book, which is good and helps me to better understand what they planned to do and what they got. In this short comment, I would like to focus on Objectification, one of the four dynamics they introduced in Chapter 1. As explained in Page 9, “dynamics” direct us to “look for both the driving forces as well as the emergent patterns of change”. And the problem of “Dynamics of objectification” was defined in the book as “how do people engage with the Internet as an instance of material culture through which they are caught up in processes of identification”. So, Objectification is actually the Trinidadian’s self-identification process during using of Internet. This identification can be either realization of what they really are (expansive realization) or what they could be (expansive potential).
In Chapter 3 dynamics of objectification were used to understand the Internet’s impact on Trinidadian’s everyday life. One of the examples was the kinships in families. As Trinidad is a country with vast amount of international or distant relationships, many families in Trinidad have relatives who live abroad or far away. Emails, e-cards and other Internet-based communication methods enabled the family members to keep in touch with each other on a frequent basis or even daily basis. As an example mentioned in the book that impressed me most, there was an old widow, who relied on Internet to communicate with other relatives after her husband’s death. These communications were described as “a new lease of life”. In my understanding, through the Internet communication applications, those Trinidad recreated their identity as members of their families, sent their cars and felt been cared by other family members, which became very important and part of their “real” life. Authors also mentioned the use of online chat and ICQ in Chapter 3. This communication method was considered by the author more like “expansive potential” than “expansive realization” (Page 62). Unlike the use of emails, the online chatting happened mostly between non-relatives. Many Trinidadian considered it a new method to know more friends or even develop new relationships. Research results showed that some marriages did begin with the random online chatting. As mentioned in the book, most conversations happened between opposite sexes to flirt with each other. But we also need to notice the case described in Page 65 about online chatting that realized sharing of mundane life. Some Trinidadians considered it as part of their everyday life and create serious friendship with other chatters. The chatting group or online community was also identified as part of “real” life instead of “virtual” chats. I agree with the authors that studying the dynamics of identification is very important for researchers to understand the development of Internet in that area.

Posted by mzhu4 at 02:18 PM | Permalink

Paper Proposal

Posted by mzhu4 at 04:09 PM | Permalink

Question: When scholars write about communication technologies, they often focus on successful technologies. Successful technologies, in turn, are usually described as ever-expanding or "diffusing" throughout society until they are widespread. In this context, Fischer's analysis of the decline in rural telephony in Chapter 4 is remarkable and unusual. Please evaluate this argument in chapter 4. You might comment on his evidence for the decline, his analysis, or his explanation of it. Is the explanation convincing? You might compare it to discussions of other technologies we have read. Does this analysis demonstrate a strength or weakness in his method? (Or, Why did he find this decline when other scholars rarely if ever highlight any declines?)

My Response
In his book, Fischer described the development of telephone as both technology and business. One thing makes his work unique is his description of the decline of telephone services in rural area during 1930s. In Chapter 4 of the book, the author gave evidence that the percentage of rural area’s adoption of telephone service experienced decreasing in that period of time, which was the Depression of America. But Fischer argued that the Depression was not the reason of usage decline in rural area. Because, for example, farmers still spent many money on automobiles and the tendency was increasing. So, Fischer concluded that the farmers should have the ability to pay for telephone and they just chose not to do so or just didn’t have that service. As for the reasons, Fischer attributed it to two major ones. First, the available substitute technology. As pointed out by Fischer, there were many other communication technologies available for people from rural area, including automobile, telegraph and more. These new technology made telephone not such a must-have equipment in people’s home. Farmers then evaluated several choices and some abandoned telephone. And second, the changing political economy of the industry. The government was no longer forced the service providers to serve rural areas. Consequently, many rural areas didn’t have reliable services, which led the decline of usage.
I personally found both his evidence and explanation not very strong, though the analysis process seemed to be rational. In the book, Fischer used statistical numbers to indicate the decline of telephone services in rural areas. In his description, we also had the information that many rural areas were not served directly by the service providers and some of them were operated through private and small-scale companies. It was not clear if this portion of services were included in the number of not. As stated by the author, the big companies were not willing to invest in rural area, which was even so when there was no pressure from government. But, at the same time, the farmers might find their own way to be connected. The usage of telephone is not easily traceable as the using of automobile. As for Fischer’s explanations, I’m not satisfied with his claim that the Depression was not the reason why some farmers abandoned telephone service. His evidence was the amount of money farmers spent on automobile and other technology was not declining severely as telephone. For me, it is the Depression that forced the farmers to choose between several options. And telephone is different from either automobile or radio. Users only have to pay for automobile and radio once for the equipment and the further usage is totally under the owner’s control. For example, during the Depression, the farmers may still have automobile but didn’t drive it very often. For telephone, it was different. If it was the flat-rate service, users had to pay monthly fee for the service, which might make some gave this service up. The second explanation of telephone usage decline sounds reasonable for me. The decrease of service quality would definitely lead to decline of users.
Overall, I think Fischer’s finding is strength of his study, though flawed. The reason why other researchers didn’t notice or didn’t focus on this phenomenon might be that they often look at the long-range development of certain technology on a broader view. And at the same time, it is very easy for researchers to focus on brighter side of things. The “diffusion” of telephone is ultimately successful, which may obscure the fact that it experienced some decline in certain areas during this increasing tendency.

Posted by mzhu4 at 05:08 PM | Permalink

Today's question: Douglas has written an explanation of the social construction of radio in order to avoid technological determinism. The "constructors" proposed in this book are inventors, the press, amateur operators, the military, the Radio Corporation of America (RCA) and others. One sure way to avoid "determinism" is to advance a narrative that contains more than one possible outcome. Can you use the materials in this book to propose a plausible alternative way that radio might have developed in the U.S.? If yes, explain the alternative. If not, discuss what information you would need in order to propose an alternative (that is, information that you don't have in this book).

My Response:
In Douglas' description about the American broadcasting history, there were different kinds of powers that shaped the process. To picture an alternative history, the story should also begin with Marconi and his invention. As described in the book, Marconi’s success in the beginning of his career and later expansions was, at least partly, subject to his awareness of importance of management of the corporation and the strategy of standing in the focus of press. Marconi combined the research and marketing very well and thus made his company developed better than that of Fessenden’s, De Forest’s, Stone’s and others. If these companies were all successful or even sought cooperation or merging with each other, the development of radio technology could be accelerated. They each developed different ideas and adopted different orientations of the development of radio. If the progresses on receivers, emitters and different paradigm of radio applications could be combined together, the world would have seen the emergence of radio broadcasting network several years earlier than the history.
As for the role of amateur wireless operators, if in the disaster of Titanic they played a positive role, such as helping with broadcasting survivor lists or warning about the sunk of Titanic, the amateurs can be further encouraged by the public. A few talented men among them may also invent some new devices and made radio popular for ordinary people. When the power of amateur and companies were developing at the same time, the government agencies, such as the navy, would also fostered radio technology through cooperation with companies and researchers in universities. The government then made regulations and rules for radio frequencies used for different purposes and all operators followed the same rules. In my imagination, the other alternative is more harmonious and efficient. Powers from different sources can enhance each other. It is more like a Utopian picture and common people were more powerful and thus were given more freedom.
Another thing I want to mention is that, it seems that in the history, sometimes the imagination of scientists was confined by their knowledge and their confidence about the calculation results. In the case of radio, in 1899, scientists believed the transmission of radio waves to remote areas required extra high towers, which was proved not true. Others who ignored or had no access of this result finally made some progress, such as Marconi. A similar case is the invention of atom bomb during WWII. The major Germany scientist made a mistake in calculation and concluded that the amount of uranium needed to make an atom bomb was larger than the total amount Germany can access. This conclusion resulted in the abandon of the whole project. If Germany was the first country that made the first atom bomb, the history would be totally different. There were always many alternatives in the history. Somehow, we are living in the distinct one due to some unknown reasons…

Another Version (just for fun):

At the first beginning, Marconi's company also went bankruptcy, as well as the other several ones, because of the slow progress and reliability of wireless communication. At the same time, this new technology was suppressed by other powers, such as telephone companies and telegraph companies. People were skeptical about this new technology due to its complex equipment and unknown of related knowledge. Consequently, in the Titanic disaster, no one would think about it and its benefits. There was no large amount of funding from investors nor government. Only several armatures were studying and testing it as their own hobby. Soon, with the coming of WWI and WWII, the governments of different countries soon found the importance of wireless communication and then investigated a large amount of money in the researches. Pushed by the need of war, wireless technology developed very quickly. The country that mastered the technology of wireless communication gained the key of victory. After the wars, radio technology was used for ordinary people and gradually shaped as what we see today. In this different setting, the development of radio broadcasting was delayed but still emerged in the history.

Posted by mzhu4 at 11:42 PM | Permalink