The conflict market polarizing consumer culture(s) in counter-democracy
(2022) In Journal of Consumer Culture 22(4). p.908-928- Abstract
At the beginning of the millennium, consumer culture researchers predicted that people would increasingly demand that marketplace actors subscribe to contemporary ethics of liberal democracy. Although their prediction indeed came true, they did not foresee that an algorithm-powered media ecosystem in combination with growing authoritarian movements would soon come to fuel an increasingly polarized political landscape and challenge the very fundament of liberal democracy per se. In this macroscopic, conceptual article, I discuss three assumption-challenging logics—counter-democratic consumer culture, de-dialectical algorithmic manipulation, and growing illiberal consumer resistance—according to which the market increasingly monetizes the... (More)
At the beginning of the millennium, consumer culture researchers predicted that people would increasingly demand that marketplace actors subscribe to contemporary ethics of liberal democracy. Although their prediction indeed came true, they did not foresee that an algorithm-powered media ecosystem in combination with growing authoritarian movements would soon come to fuel an increasingly polarized political landscape and challenge the very fundament of liberal democracy per se. In this macroscopic, conceptual article, I discuss three assumption-challenging logics—counter-democratic consumer culture, de-dialectical algorithmic manipulation, and growing illiberal consumer resistance—according to which the market increasingly monetizes the conflicts accompanying this polarization and, thereby, reinforces it. I call this new logic a conflict market and illustrate it through three, historically situated and currently conflicting, consumer ideoscapes—the neoblue, the neogreen, and the neobrown—between which consumers engage in marketized conflicts, not in a de-politicizing way, but in an increasingly un-politicizing, de-dialectical, and polarizing way. At the technologically manipulated conflict market, the role of marketers is to monetize politically sensitive topics by creating conflict, knowingly renouncing large groups of consumers, and giving fodder to the political extremes.
(Less)
- author
- Ulver, Sofia LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2022
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- algorithmic identities, brand activism, conflict market, consumer resistance, counter-democracy, monetization, polarization, surveillance capitalism
- in
- Journal of Consumer Culture
- volume
- 22
- issue
- 4
- pages
- 908 - 928
- publisher
- SAGE Publications
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85111672100
- ISSN
- 1469-5405
- DOI
- 10.1177/14695405211026040
- project
- The Multicultural Imaginary
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 98a4acb0-0258-4c8f-ac31-142aa50a319b
- date added to LUP
- 2021-08-30 15:39:05
- date last changed
- 2023-09-12 23:49:14
@article{98a4acb0-0258-4c8f-ac31-142aa50a319b,
abstract = {{<p>At the beginning of the millennium, consumer culture researchers predicted that people would increasingly demand that marketplace actors subscribe to contemporary ethics of liberal democracy. Although their prediction indeed came true, they did not foresee that an algorithm-powered media ecosystem in combination with growing authoritarian movements would soon come to fuel an increasingly polarized political landscape and challenge the very fundament of liberal democracy per se. In this macroscopic, conceptual article, I discuss three assumption-challenging logics—counter-democratic consumer culture, de-dialectical algorithmic manipulation, and growing illiberal consumer resistance—according to which the market increasingly monetizes the conflicts accompanying this polarization and, thereby, reinforces it. I call this new logic a conflict market and illustrate it through three, historically situated and currently conflicting, consumer ideoscapes—the neoblue, the neogreen, and the neobrown—between which consumers engage in marketized conflicts, not in a de-politicizing way, but in an increasingly un-politicizing, de-dialectical, and polarizing way. At the technologically manipulated conflict market, the role of marketers is to monetize politically sensitive topics by creating conflict, knowingly renouncing large groups of consumers, and giving fodder to the political extremes.</p>}},
author = {{Ulver, Sofia}},
issn = {{1469-5405}},
keywords = {{algorithmic identities; brand activism; conflict market; consumer resistance; counter-democracy; monetization; polarization; surveillance capitalism}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{4}},
pages = {{908--928}},
publisher = {{SAGE Publications}},
series = {{Journal of Consumer Culture}},
title = {{The conflict market polarizing consumer culture(s) in counter-democracy}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/14695405211026040}},
doi = {{10.1177/14695405211026040}},
volume = {{22}},
year = {{2022}},
}