Sunday 23 April 2017

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NEW MEDIA TECHNOLOGIES AND IDENTITY

IDENTITY

Basically, we do know that identity is something that differentiates one man from another. We also use the same term to name objects. In a simpler explanation, all of us have an Identification Card to identify who we are. But that is not just it. Identity is what has been developed and the product is our own self.

According to David Buckingham, identity is something we uniquely possess: it is what distinguishes us from other people (PERSONAL IDENTITY). Identity also implies a relationship with a broader collective or social group of some kind: we imply that our identity is partly a matter of what we share with other people (SOCIAL IDENTITY).

We usually think that people have particular ‘attributes’ that they carry inside them and we believe that people have somewhat fixed ‘inner essence’ (qualities beneath the surface). We also say that some people have ‘different levels of power’ which means they are more/less able to achieve what they want in their relationships with others, and society as a whole.

Foucault rejected this view. He believed that the self is being defined by a continuing discourse in a shifting communication of oneself to others. He also rejected the idea of people having some sort of inner power, because he believed power is a technique or action in which people use to communicate/engage, thus: Power is exercised, not possessed.

Foucault developed a theory: Technologies of The Self. Foucault describes this theory as the means for an identity search or self-construction through processes of life including speaking and writing. From what we know, classical view of identity is a something which is fixed. Meanwhile, Foucault came in later and says that an identity is defined by interactions with others, which is not a fixed thing within a person. It is a shifting, temporary construction – an ongoing process. This theory was described as ways individuals act upon themselves to produce particular modes of identity and sexuality. These “technologies” include methods of self-contemplation, self-disclosure, and self-discipline. People construct themselves as a way to construct their identity with the help of technologies such as blogs, social networking sites, mobile phones.

We will look at identity from three perspectives:
1)      Gender
2)      Ethnicity
3)      Religion



A)  GENDER

From birth, children are assigned a gender identity and are socialized to conform to certain gender roles based on their biological sex. Children are taught the difference of gender roles within the sexes, shaping masculinities and femininities. Basic gender roles are colors: Blue is for boys and pink is for girls. Another example is the toy products: Cars and robots are for boys and dolls are for girls. Maybe a woman’s iconic skill is cooking and knitting while men should be good at fishing and carpentry work.

Judith Butler (1988) argues that “gender identity is a performative accomplishment compelled by social sanction and taboo (520)”. In other words, gender is not the starting place. Gender is constructed repeatedly through time by the act of your performance. Gender is informed by what is already historically established, thus, performed and followed by the people around you. We are forced to follow these gender roles because there exists a party that has established the binary gender system as determinate. However, if gender was not properly performed, a different repetition of acts will take place and would result in a different gender. There are also social expectations and taboos that discourage us from doing so.

With new media technologies, dominant gender divisions can be put to an end. The Internet can be used as a platform to educate public on gender diversity. However, the traditional groups that were put together because of perceived biological similarities need to find new means of connection based on choice.



B)  RACE AND ETHNICITY

According to Eugenia Siapera in her book, Understanding The Media, stated that Manuel Castells (2000) accepts that race and ethnicity still exist in the network society, but he argues that they no longer have any power to provide strong common identities. This is because any race and ethnic is defined by their clear and relevant territorial basis – which provides common ethnic bonds. However, they (race and ethnicity) have lost their historical significance due to the delinking between identities and spaces. In other words, because ethnic identities are no longer bound to specific territories, and because also space itself becomes delinked from geography, ethnicity cannot provide meaning for individuals living in the network society. We no longer hold ourselves rooted in particular territories, as we are letting the participation of different networks come to us. These different networks may also be not bounded to geography, but they create their own space.

New media technologies bring positive and negative impacts on race and ethnicity.

From positive views: We can say that race and ethnicity could proliferate/increase rapidly with the existence of the Internet. The Internet also allows communities from all around the world to socialize and get together to pursue a political goal. For an example, the Internet allows communities from all around the world to communicate and protest bombings in Syria and Palestine. There are even websites to collect donation for the victims of the bombings.

From negative views: With the existence of new media technologies, the issue of ethnicity diversity occurs – multiculturalism. As of now, we can see that new culture always comes along and influence or assimilate in our original culture. For an example, Malaysian youth nowadays prefer Western food than local ones. They even prefer shops from foreign companies such as Starbucks, McDonald’s, Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC), and Sushi King. Westernization can also be seen through fashion. Teenagers prefer foreign brandings and designs for their clothes and footwear such as Adidas, Nike, Levi’s, Diesel and Guess.



C)  RELIGION

According to Anthony Giddens (1991), the meaning of “identity” from the classical views is different with the modern times. Identity is not fixed and static, but it is an ongoing process and a project. So does new media technologies have an impact on religious identity then? Basically, religion is fixed because it was based on dogma – a set of beliefs that is accepted by the members of a group without being questioned or doubted. However, the modern society could use the technology as a platform to carry out various functions which have made such institutions go virtual. Religion is accessible when we are traveling, and by this, I mean we could just log onto the Internet and go to some websites on religion, search for religion teachings, and again there are mobile applications, etc.

Another point of the connectivity between religion and technology is that this relationship resulted in the resurgence of religious identities. These may be the reaction to the lack of clear guiding and moral principles for modern identities. In other words, people use technology to exhibit their understandings on religion in various ways and creating a new kind of identity that promotes the same religion but have a hidden agenda. Examples are as shown below:

"We Hate Islam" facebook page promotes anti-Islam.

Sisters In Islam (SIS) official website.

ConvertsToIslam is a website made by people to promote Islam teachings and discussion.



REFERENCES:

Buckingham, D. (2008). Youth, Identity, and Digital Media. London: MIT press.

Butler, J. (1988). Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in Phenomenology and Feminist Theory. Theatre Journal, 40(4), 519. doi:10.2307/3207893


Siapera, E. (2017). Understanding new media. Place of publication not identified: Sage Publications.

No comments:

Post a Comment