A place called home : and audience studies
(2014) ECREA 2014 : Communication for empowerment : citizens, markets, innovations p.1-1- Abstract
- The home has a self-evident place within audience studies. In spite of this salient position, the home has seldom been theoretically problematized; it has often been ‘reduced’ to a social context of the prioritized media engagement (domestication research is partly an exception).
The paper is further justified by the fact that media and media practices are important for the home and its boundaries. Digital media in general have the potential of making the home to a global node and the intense presence of social network services in many homes (and all other places) turn the boundary between the private and the public on its head. On the other hand, as many scholars convincingly have argued, media practices are often place- or... (More) - The home has a self-evident place within audience studies. In spite of this salient position, the home has seldom been theoretically problematized; it has often been ‘reduced’ to a social context of the prioritized media engagement (domestication research is partly an exception).
The paper is further justified by the fact that media and media practices are important for the home and its boundaries. Digital media in general have the potential of making the home to a global node and the intense presence of social network services in many homes (and all other places) turn the boundary between the private and the public on its head. On the other hand, as many scholars convincingly have argued, media practices are often place- or homemaking practices (Moores, 2012; Pink and Mackley, 2013). Also the discursive aspects should be recognized; lifestyle-media such as glossy magazines, TV-shows and blogs spur people to ‘fix’ their homes – and thereby ‘fixate’ them as secure places.
With point of departure in four theoretical perspectives, each illuminating different aspects of the increasingly complex home, this paper elaborates a theoretical model of the media-home. The first one is domestication research, a branch of audience studies focusing the process of personal/domestic appropriation of media, where media are considered as articulated by technologies, symbolic environments and individual texts (Hartmann, 2006). Here, the interconnection between the media and the social is stressed. The second one is mediatization: the study of how media mold social processes on the level of institutions as well as private lifeworlds (Hepp 2013). While domestication tends to focus how daily socio-cultural settings (for example the home) influence media practices, mediatization provide opportunities to elaborate the reverse process; how media and media practices affect the home and the domestic context. Third, communication geography (Adams and Jansson, 2012), which can be deployed in order to unfold the dialectical process related to mediation. This process is constituted by a tension - and interplay - between media practice as a mobile and/or placemaking practice. Fourth, and finally, the outlining of the media-home may draw on (parts of) non-representational theory – or ‘more-than-representational theory’ (Lorimer, 2005) which is a better term. As this perspective emphasizes practice as a constitutive force, the home here is made up of routinized and embodied homemaking practices – including habitual media practices (Pink and Mackley, 2013).
Combining aspects of these four perspectives will provide a theoretical foundation of the media-home from which empirical studies can be made, focusing the mutual impact of home and the media.
(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/04482f33-642a-4dd3-b121-c147dd1e9d08
- author
- Andersson, Magnus LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2014
- type
- Contribution to conference
- publication status
- published
- subject
- pages
- 1 - 1
- conference name
- ECREA 2014 : Communication for empowerment : citizens, markets, innovations
- conference location
- Lisbon, Portugal
- conference dates
- 2014-11-12 - 2014-11-15
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 04482f33-642a-4dd3-b121-c147dd1e9d08
- date added to LUP
- 2019-05-24 14:37:26
- date last changed
- 2019-06-12 11:25:34
@misc{04482f33-642a-4dd3-b121-c147dd1e9d08,
abstract = {{The home has a self-evident place within audience studies. In spite of this salient position, the home has seldom been theoretically problematized; it has often been ‘reduced’ to a social context of the prioritized media engagement (domestication research is partly an exception). <br/>The paper is further justified by the fact that media and media practices are important for the home and its boundaries. Digital media in general have the potential of making the home to a global node and the intense presence of social network services in many homes (and all other places) turn the boundary between the private and the public on its head. On the other hand, as many scholars convincingly have argued, media practices are often place- or homemaking practices (Moores, 2012; Pink and Mackley, 2013). Also the discursive aspects should be recognized; lifestyle-media such as glossy magazines, TV-shows and blogs spur people to ‘fix’ their homes – and thereby ‘fixate’ them as secure places. <br/>With point of departure in four theoretical perspectives, each illuminating different aspects of the increasingly complex home, this paper elaborates a theoretical model of the media-home. The first one is domestication research, a branch of audience studies focusing the process of personal/domestic appropriation of media, where media are considered as articulated by technologies, symbolic environments and individual texts (Hartmann, 2006). Here, the interconnection between the media and the social is stressed. The second one is mediatization: the study of how media mold social processes on the level of institutions as well as private lifeworlds (Hepp 2013). While domestication tends to focus how daily socio-cultural settings (for example the home) influence media practices, mediatization provide opportunities to elaborate the reverse process; how media and media practices affect the home and the domestic context. Third, communication geography (Adams and Jansson, 2012), which can be deployed in order to unfold the dialectical process related to mediation. This process is constituted by a tension - and interplay - between media practice as a mobile and/or placemaking practice. Fourth, and finally, the outlining of the media-home may draw on (parts of) non-representational theory – or ‘more-than-representational theory’ (Lorimer, 2005) which is a better term. As this perspective emphasizes practice as a constitutive force, the home here is made up of routinized and embodied homemaking practices – including habitual media practices (Pink and Mackley, 2013).<br/>Combining aspects of these four perspectives will provide a theoretical foundation of the media-home from which empirical studies can be made, focusing the mutual impact of home and the media.<br/>}},
author = {{Andersson, Magnus}},
language = {{eng}},
pages = {{1--1}},
title = {{A place called home : and audience studies}},
year = {{2014}},
}