The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Participation, Remediation, Bricolage: Considering Principal Components of a Digital Culture
Open accessAbstract
Within media theory the worldwide shift from a 19th-century print culture via a 20th-century electronic culture to a 21st-century digital culture is well documented. In this essay the emergence of a digital culture as amplified and accelerated by the popularity of networked computers, multiple-user software, and Internet is investigated in terms of its principal components. A digital culture as an underdetermined praxis is conceptualized as consisting of participation, remediation, and bricolage. Using the literature on presumably “typical” Internet phenomena such as the worldwide proliferation of independent media centers (indymedia) linked with (radical) online journalism practices and the popularity of (individual and group) weblogging, the various meanings and implications of this particular understanding of digital culture are explored. In the context of this essay, digital culture can be seen as an emerging set of values, practices, and expectations regarding the way people (should) act and interact within the contemporary network society. This digital culture has emergent properties with roots in both online and offline phenomena, with links to trends and developments predating the World Wide Web, yet having an immediate impact and particularly changing the ways in which we use and give meaning to living in an increasingly interconnected, always on(line) environment.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Radical Media: Rebellious Communication and Social Movements
Downing, J. (2001) · doi:10.4135/9781452204994 · Cited by 1,184
Cited by
The Hybrid Media System: Politics and Power
Chadwick, A. (2017) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190696726.001.0001 · Cited by 1,174
Seven dimensions of contemporary participation disentangled
Kelty, C., Panofsky, A., Currie, M., Crooks, R., Erickson, S., Garcia, P., Wartenbe, M., & Wood, S. (2015) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23202 · Cited by 124
Pera, R., Quinton, S., & Baima, G. (2020) · Psychology & Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21337 · Cited by 69
Social Media and Medical Professionalism: Rethinking the Debate and the Way Forward
Fenwick, T. (2014) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000000436 · Cited by 34
Messing with Merton: The intersection between Open Science practices and Mertonian values
Hosseini, M., Senabre Hidalgo, E., Horbach, S. P. J. M., Guttinger, S., & Penders, B. (2022) · doi:10.31235/osf.io/9nyh8 · Cited by 30
The Commodification of the Couch: A Dialectical Analysis of Hospitality Exchange Platforms
Schöpf, S. (2015) · tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society · doi:10.31269/triplec.v13i1.480 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Deuze, M.
- Venue
- The Information Society
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2006-04
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 63-75
- ISSN
- 0197-2243 (ISSN-L)
- 1087-6537
- OpenAlex
- W2165379068
- Cited by
- 673
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 15.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.