To begin, a major difference I noticed between the two works was within the agendas of the digital platforms. While Castells discusses several examples of political movements that utilized the Internet to further propel their political agendas by raising awareness of the issues and in turn gaining followers, Sanchez initial intent used her blog as to depict life within Cuba "from the everyday perspective of a woman" (154).
It was through the commentary of viewers that political agendas and opinions were expressed, debated, and spread, although it can be argues that Sanchez does have a political agenda within her blog as well. Dahlgreen coins this concept 'civil cultures' which means that "in this process, individuals are redefining the terms of cilivl participation in ways that privilege expression over debate, cultural affiliations over geopolitical ones, and localized agency over broader sovereignty" (158).
Through individuals ability to construct user profiles and avatars, those who comment can provide hyperlinks to their own websites, political agendas, or other avenues of research. This notion of sharing mirrors Castells discussion of using platforms to gain awareness or attract users to political agendas. Sanchez extended her online presence through the use of twitter, noting the increased networking of being followed/following that has accumulated over the years. The blog itself has also become a platform for SNS which has evolved to allowing people to share via Facebook and Twitter while also utilizing the opportunity to email and other notifications on each post.
I thought it was interesting how Sanchez organizes her blog in a way that keeps those who follow the blog consistently active. While disabling comments on previous postings, in order to participate users have to stay current. This is a tactic that is two fold, and encourages users to stay active, while also furthering current discussion of newer topics.
Another major difference between Castells and Rubira and Gil-Egui was their focus. While this may seem overly obvious, it is important to note that Castells speaks on broader terms for the implications of the Internet on political movements. Rubira and Gil-Egui's article zooms in on just one digital platform, and discusses the different implications or avenues or political agenda users can take. However, in the beginning of the article. I noted that the key issues within Sanchez's article were all key issues within Castells book. These issues include the following: civil and political rights inside the island (thought of Spanish and Egyptian revolutions here), the existence of a significant crisis of values (Tunisia and the Arab Spring), and national economic disintegration (Iceland and Occupy Wall Street) (154). Additionally, Sanchez identifies herself as politically neutral, staying away from any overt opposition group. This notion highly contrasts the examples provided by Castells, where users are identifying with particular movements with a specific political agenda.
Rubira and Gil-Egui discuss the work of Castells within their article, bringing attention to Castells notion of the public sphere and its attribution to the following:
Geographical dispersion, transnational reach, diverse membership, horizontal organizing, plural identities, fragmented agendas, transient commitments, quick mobilization, and the frequently mob-like collective actions that characterize many contemporary forms of civic engagement. (155)
Globalization issues is a theme that is shared between Castells book and Rubira and Gil-Egui's article. Castells discusses globalization as a means to fuel movements, such as the Egyptian Revolution when the government shut the internet off. Sanchez is also allocated certain internet platforms and connections through other countries, such as a the U.S. because of the tight control and limited access of the Internet by the government in Cuba. However, this assistance from other countries raises questions, in which Lamrani questions "Sanchez ability to maintain Generation Y without strong financial and technical support from foreign agencies" (157). In this way, globalization not only refers to access sharing, but also as a way to spread awareness or gain followers on a national level as well as a certain level of dependency on such global collaboration. Sanchez stresses that her followers are primarily located outside of Cuba, and as a result create discussion all around the world.
I would have liked to see more information on the demographic of people that comment and follow Sanchez's blog. I appreciated Castells discussion of the demographics of people participating in each movement, noting their age, gender, and level of education. I found that Rubira and Gil-Egui did a great job of discussing the visual representation and identities of users who follow Sanchez regarding their avatars and profiles, but no research was conducted regarding their lives outside of the digital realm.
Another aspect of the Rubira and Gil-Egui article that I found pushed against Castells falls among the topic of agenda within the Internet. While the examples provided by Castells had a specific agenda within their utilization of the Internet, Sanchez's users "saw the Internet as a discursive medium, rather than as a way of becoming involved in 'real' collective action or shaping policymaking" (159). I think this is a central difference between the two pieces, and is important to consider when reflecting on the implications of the Internet and the globalization of such digital platforms. Not all users who access such spaces have the same agenda, and not everyone participating in discussion wants to carry out specific action in real-life but merely see such spaces as a safe platform for political expression and debate.
Although Sanchez's blog hosts many different types of postings, I thought it was interesting when referring to Figure 1 that the postings which received the most attention were all still inherently political (civil rights coercion, economy, politics, and society). As indicated by Rubira and Gil-Egui, "this fact offers a less than subtle hint of the implicit editorial line of the blog" (170).
To conclude, perhaps the main difference between Castells Networks of Outrage and Hope and Rubira and Gil-Egui's "Political Communication in the Cuban blogsphere: A case study of Generation Y" can be found on within the conclusion of the Rubira and Gil-Egui article, which states "Generation Y possesses like many other online forums, the characteristics of an expressive public sphere, rather than of a deliberative one" (173). I believe the examples presented within Castell's book shows us examples of deliberative public sphere's and the case study of Sanchez's blog displays an openly expressive public sphere that is fueled by the participation of its users.
No comments:
Post a Comment