Constitutive effects of technological frames in everyday interaction

Authors

  • Nils Oliver Klowait MSSES, University of Manchester , University of York Автор

Keywords:

whole body involvement, Goffman Erving, frame analysis, technological frame, technology, media, channels

Abstract

This article deals with the question of the degree to which the material constraints of frames have a 'speculative independence', i. e. whether frame analysis theorists can meaningfully make conceptual pre-empirical claims based on material structures within particular frames. As a starting point, 'technological frames' will be conceptualized, i. e. frames that have definitive technological components (radio, TV, print). During the process of theoretical evaluation, four core Goffmanian concepts are linked: frame, focus, co-presence and channels. These terms are consequently used to argue that technological frames are special and symptomatic: they create a lack of whole body interactive autonomy, thereby causing the modern phenomenon of communicative transgressions such as adding emoticons in text-based conversations. The task of affirming a speculative independence to technological frame structure fails at universalizing its dynamics, but does have the potential as a research focus into media development.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bateson G. (1999). Steps to an ecology of mind, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Dickey M.H., Wasko M.M., Chudoba K.M., Bennet Thatcher J. (2006). Do You Know What I Know? A Shared Understandings Perspective on Text-Based Communication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, (12): 66-87.

Goffman E. (1981). Forms of talk, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Goffman E. (1986). Frame analysis: an essay on the organization of experience, Boston: Northeastern University Press.

Goffman E. (2005). Interaction ritual: essays in face-to-face behavior, New Brunswick, N. J.: Aldine Transaction.

Gundel M., Haring K. (2002). Keith Haring: short messages: posters, Munich, N. Y.: Prestel.

Huxley A. (1956). Brave new world, N. Y.: Modern Library.

Jacobsen M.H. (ed.) (2010). The contemporary Goffman, N. Y.: Routledge.

Klotz L. (2005). How (not) to communicate new scientific information: a memoir of the famous Brindley lecture. BJU Int, (96): 956-957.

Loyola R. (2013). Double Robotics review: Why go to the office when a robot can go for you? (http://www.macworld.com/article/2051342/double-robotics-review-why-go-to-the-office-when-a-robot-can-go-for-you-.html)

Pinch T., Bijker W. (1989). The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts. W. Bijker, Th. Hughes, T. Pinch (eds). The Social Construction of Technological Systems, Cambridge, Mass., London: MIT Press: 111-134

Downloads

Published

2015-01-15

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Klowait N.O. Constitutive effects of technological frames in everyday interaction // Sociology of Power. 2015. Vol. 27, no. 1. P. 166–180.

Коды статьи

  • EDN TQASUB
  • Тип статьи (РИНЦ) Научная статья (Научная статья)