The Resistance of Hidden Group in the Blogosphere: Watch out! Your Enemy Might Make a Blog About You, Babe!

NOW, let’s talk about the media we use, the BLOG! Blogosphere is a medium that reaches a worldwide community, is unbounded by time and geography. Practically, blog users must affirmatively search the blog, thus many scholars argue that blogs attract homogenous group readers or niche audiences who have pre-existing interest to the issue or particular subjects (Terrilli&Arnorsdortir, 2008). Mark Warren Liew, in his study on the exploration of student resistance, contends, “an informal blogosphere thrives beyond these official uses, characterized by all manner of backstage talk, from casual chatting, joking, and banter to vicious complaints, slander, and rumor” (2010, p. 306). Thus, individuals or groups use blogs to express their opinion towards authoritative objects, such as religious leaders, teachers (yeah, the teacher that become the “student enemy”), governments, legislators, and maybe you ... With the freedom of expression in the blogosphere, individuals or groups are able to publicly humiliate, criticize, and mock the authoritative objects. This expression is a part of the resistance towards the hegemonic culture or dominant publics. This is include corporations or conventional mass media.

 As Samuel Terrilli and Liney Inga Arnorsdottir contend that blog is not a “no choice” area, where people have no choice to consume the message, people need to affirmatively search the blog (2010), just like you end up finding this blog. For example, a medium such as a public advertisement sometimes “imposes” its message on the audience. However, blogs are located in a virtual area, where people choose to search it, click it, open it, and eventually read or consume the message. Blogs are not a “pop up” media (taaa daaa…), where people can get a surprise because the message suddenly appears and audiences are “forced” to see it (I’m a bit hyperbolic here). Therefore, in terms of choices, exposing blogs’ messages requires more effort because blogs are in a virtual free public access; people have to search for this blog, and eventually decide to look at the content (audience “on demand” process).

The nature of the blogosphere, also determines the typological audience from this message. The audience who do not demand to search for a particular message will not get exposure to it. Amanda Lenhart and Sussanah Fox also pointed out the homogenous audience and the niche community of the blogosphere, providing a unique audience and community interaction.

“HOT” IDEAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH:

a.     Exploring the conversation in the blog about the form of resistance from “opposition” group of society to government or dominant group

b.     Search for visual production as a symbol of resistance in the blog

c.      (this one a bit scary) find “unique” group such as terrorist group, polygamist group, or rebellion group, and observe their conversations in the blog.

Baidu VS Google: Who wins?

Search engine such as Baidu and Google can be considered as an important source for information gathering, surveillance upon particular issue, and understanding information framing perceived by Internet users (Segev, 2010; Li, 1998, Kennedy, 2009). Using the Panopticon metaphor—what the hec is this Panopticon thing? Well, read Foucoult and you’ll understand, simple thing I could say is government control every movement of citizen-- (Tsui, 2001), Baidu’s system limits information, news, and article for the government security issue and targets the Chinese users (Barbosa, 2010). Even though Google also obeys the Internet censorship policy by the “Great Firewall of China” (BBC, 2006), but Google have less restricted content, targets for more global users, and concerns with more global content (Rand, 2008). Therefore, Baidu become more Chinese oriented search engine and Google become more global oriented search engine.

If you ask me who is the winner? Then, the answer will be depending on which market are you talking about? In China, there are 77% users for Baidu, and only 33% Google. But in the world, Google is the king! Now, Google or Baidu is your choice. If you speak, understand Chinese writing, and you want to get information about China, Baidu is the answer. But if you speak English, (I think so, if not how could you come to my blog and read these things hehehe…) then Google can answer you question. 


So Google it! Opps… no Verb for google BABY! coz google do not want to loose the copyright of its name… hehehhe…(this one would be another discussion in another post)

“HOT” IDEAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH:

hmmm… maybe these are useful for the marketing students:

a.     I wonder how Baidu attracts more Chinese, I mean in which aspects Baidu is more attractive than Google, name, “Made in China” thing, or what? Explore this question, babe!

b.    Search for the panoptical practices in Baidu, that would be interesting

c.     Examine the different result findings between Baidu and Google.

Want to Vomit, Turn it off, or Vegetarian? Meet Your Meat Video

I am overwhelmingly drawn to video of “Meet Your Meat” in Youtube, which is posted by PETA and simultaneously sickened by them. For years I have been eating meat on my plate in various forms of food without thinking where and how this meat came from and how the animal is killed for the sake of delicious friend chicken, yummy steak, hamburger, etc.  Awww… I am hungry now.

The video portrays the undercover investigation of animal farm, to see how human treat animal during their life in the farm and how human finally killed this animal. The brutalization of the image in “Meet Your Meat” is often bravely shown blood, the painful voice of animal, violation action to animal, etc. (Don’t vomit, and keep reading, this pain will soon be finished). 

Thus, the video is not only shown slaughtering process of animal, but also the torture that human has done in order to give painful remark in every slice of meat. The conventions of scene in the video are disconcerting for me as “meat-tarian” and pushing me to change my life style to be vegetarian, to overcome my guilty feeling as a human who involved in killing the animal by consuming them. CONFESSION: Well, eventually I am still a meat lover, xixixixi.....

 The video from PETA is one of the videos in digital media, which uses persuasive approach through emotional appeal, to create certain sensation to their audience through the visualization of animal torture. The viewers of this video reach until 14.353.689 viewers (9/17/11). Through the development of Internet, individual or organization can easily upload video to gain their objective. 

The video of PETA has illustrated the idea of power and image.  This video has created a disturbance in audience cognition (Maybe you remember CDT, Cognitive Dissonance Theory by Festinger, 1957), vivid memory, and persuasive message in the same time. PETA wants to offer emotional attach to the audience with the issue they want to advocate in the public sphere. However, the use of visual rhetoric for emotional appeal may in lead into action, but also rejection, development of other emotional appeal, and confirmation of co-exist commitment.

“HOT” IDEAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH:

Actually many researches have been done for PETA, because PETA is pretty “interesting” for scholars, but you still can have research on:

a.  Exploring the audience’s response on PETA video through quantitative research such as survey or FGD

b.   Research on other PETA’s persuasive message, because they have tons that pretty much similar. Maybe textual analysis or rhetorical criticism can be done

c.  Find out the visual pattern of vegetarianism through YouTube content analysis, Fun!!!

SRI PARTY for Sri Mulyani, Indonesia 2014: Facebook On Fire

Reading the “SRI Party Maneuver for Elections” in Jakarta Post on Monday, 01/09/2012, it tickles me to explore deeper on why SRI Party, which failed to pass the “verification” test at the Law and Human Rights Ministry, still “on fire” (no better words to express this except in Sundanesse: keukeuh) to shot more maneuvers for 2014 Presidential Election in my beloved country: Indonesia.

What can we celebrate through their effort and “why on earth” this is an intriguing indication of democratic participation in Indonesia?

Let me track back, what so unique about the development of SRI Party briefly. The Facebook Group "We believe in the Integrity of Sri Mulyani Indrawati" reached over 131,000 members in only one month. This number of people is only 0.3% of Facebook users population in Indonesia or only 0.05% of total population in Indonesia. However, this public support reached more than 100.429 members in just a month according to Detik.com (Wednesday, 24/02/10). This Facebook group became a public advocacy from the members to Sri Mulyani as an individual in political problem. 

The group support continued further by building the social movement of SMI Keadilan (Solidaritas Masyarakat Indonesia untuk Keadilan) or SMI Justice (Solidarity of Indonesian Society for Justice). It is also the abbreviation of the inspired figure of this movement, Sri Mulyani Indrawati (SMI). The social movement uses social media mainly to mobilize their activities in every province.

The next phase after Facebook group in provincial-based was they have the intention to build political party.  The objective is to support their inspired figure to enter the presidential candidacy in 2014. The development of SRI Party demonstrated the promising prediction on the power of Social Media to offer wider opportunity in participatory democracy. Wooley (2010) argued that Facebook could be used to counter dominant discourses. At that time, the dominant discourse is on the negative judgment to Sri Mulyani in regards to her responsibility in giving bail out to Century Bank. The Facebook group offer alternative perspective upon that issue, by supporting Sri Mulyani.

Tanis and Postmes (2003) also mentioned that Facebook groups enable individuals to present the wide variety of information about their provision or displeasure for a cause, issue, or candidate. Norris (2003) mentioned it as ‘interactive linkage between citizens’. Here, Facebook members can express their opinion about the issue of Sri Mulyani and other political concerns, they even can create their own individual production and engage in political discourse in creative and free way.

Even though, SRI Party is still new; however, it goes to further question on Earl and Shussman (2003) point of view on the ‘members’ convert to ‘users’, that people tend to disengage after the action they support in digital media develop further. The enthusiasm of membership who want to join the party need longer time to be gained members in Facebook, especially when we compare with the beginning of this movement in “We believe in the Integrity of Sri Mulyani Indrawati” Facebook Group. This situation challenges the commitment of members, since virtual members have weak-tie bonding (Kavanaugh et al, 2005). Thus, the commitment of virtual supporter cannot guarantee the “real” support (Loader, 2010; Diani 2000; Clark & Themudo 2003) in Sri Party. So, for supporters of Sri Mulyani, I suggest to go to the “field” and search for “real” member and not only concentrating on “online members.

Cheers!

“HOT” IDEAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH:

a.     Research in quantitative content analysis on the categories of political Facebook conversation

b.    Exploring the idea of citizenship through Facebook especially in political campaign, through discourse analysis or qualitative research

c.     Examining the motivation of Facebook members to engage in politic and how do they communicate through Facebook

Undress the Ads: The Carnival of American Atheist

This ads is the most recent billboard on American Atheist “You Know It’s a Myth” 2011 Campaign. In 2010, the atheist group conducted the campaign by placing billboard with the theme "You Know It’s a Myth, This Season Celebrate Reason" in Christmas time.  

 I think the most interesting words are the words “37 million of Americans know Myth when they see them,” which show the involvement of the communicator in the advertisement. Those words also provide the statistical data about the number of Atheist people (the 37 million Americans). According to New York Times (Otterman, 2011), the Billboard with the dominant color of orange and black, have cost $ 25.000 for the placement price. Fantastic!!! Just wonder, with that much money, I can study in the USA for a year or eat Thai food for 10 years! David Silverman, The President of American Atheist argued that the purpose of this billboard is to “call out” the atheist to confess honestly about who they are. He says, “We want people to realize that there may be atheists in their family, even if those atheists don’t even know they are atheists” (Otterman, 2011). Hmm… just makes me think about ‘gay’ movement, isn’t it similar?

The billboard shows the carnival approach by questioning the hierarchy in social perception. Both Jesus and Satan are together in one line, is the typical approach of deconstructing the social structure or decoding dominant structure (Hall, 2006). The advertisement also bravely encourages people not to have fears on sanctify things (Bakhtin, 1984), such as “god,” “devil,” monster underneath your bed,” or whatever you called as sanctified.   

Now, let me play more: the words “What do you see?” in the middle of the four figure shows the “soft” approach by giving options to the audience on how they want to interpret the four figures. The atheist group did not say “You see them as myth” to the audience or “dictating” the audience to perceive the four figures as myth. Instead, they give question to the audience by a reflective and descriptive question of “what do you see?” The open question towards the sanctified figures provides spaces for the audience to believe in their own interpretation. It also allows different interpretation that challenges the dominant construction (Martin&Renegar, 2007; Hall, 2006).

The word “you” show the emphasize value of human power. The combination of an implicit approach and a deep meaning by playing the font of the words also bring atheist’s objective to value intellectuality and human power in constructing the existence of mystical objects (Dawkins, 2006). Simple way for example: human create “god” through their own thought (I did not mean to persuade you in this value, just an example, ok babe!)

How amazing it is to “undress” an ad! Let’s find another ads and discuss!

“HOT” IDEAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH:

a.   Research on “the Ads war” between Atheist and Christians group in the Christmas season in the USA.

b.    Exploring the pattern of Ads approach from Atheist group by looking at Kenneth Burke’s frames or other scholars.

c.    A textual analysis on movies about the atheist or God discourse such as “the community” TV show