In 1979, David Altheide and Robert Snow developed the concept of media logic . Originally following the idea of creating a theoretical framework to better understand mass media formats and the media’s impact on institutions and social behavior, the focus was on the mass media system of television , radio , and newspapers and its power to influence and even transform society . Although the authors primarily concentrated on the functionalities and implications of media logic in the political sphere, their overall objective was an analysis on how “social institutions are infused with media considerations” (Altheide, 2011, 122). From a critical perspective on mass media , their main argument was about an “underlying media logic that dominates our increasingly mediated (or mediatized) social order ” (ibid., 119). In this sense the original media logic concept can be understood as a term for media-infused formal and informal rules entailing multiple transformations in the social world. On that basis, the interrelation of technology , institutions , actors, and formats of media was at the core of media logic and its formative impact on society .
As the media landscape as such has changed dramatically since the early days of research on media logic , the concept has become an important approach in communication and media studies and has just recently evoked new research activities. Its strength lies in the combined assessment of theorizing and empirically analyzing the features of media and media formats in their consequences for both individual and institutional contexts. For this reason, a large part of research resting on the media logic framework addresses the core question if, and how far, different societal fields change due to the formal and informal rules of a media logic , which also can set the direction of social behavior and perceptions.
While the more traditional perspective focuses on the influence of media institutions and the respective media logic on other systems and societal fields, a socio-constructivist approach discusses the role media logic plays for social interaction , media appropriation, and media usage. On both levels, extensive theoretical and empirical research deals with the interplay between media and other social domains, such as politics (Esser & Strömbäck, 2014; Klinger & Svensson, 2015; Landerer, 2013; Meyen, Thieroff, & Strenger, 2014), culture (Siapera, 2010), journalism (Dahlgren, 1996; Korthagen, 2016), or sports (Duncan & Brummett, 1987). In European communication science, the media logics approach is also being discussed within the framework of mediatization (Krotz & Hepp, 2011; Hepp, 2012; Couldry & Hepp, 2013). In this respect, media are regarded as ‘modifiers of communication’ (Krotz & Hepp, 2011, 137), while the model of media logics is seen as a concept which helps to understand how mediatization processes come into place .
1.1 Media Logics in a Digitized World: A New Plurality of Logics
The advent of new technologies, the rise of the networked media, and a constant emergence of new media applications and platforms call for a reconsideration of the media logic concept. Nowadays, in an increasingly digitized, globalized, and networked world, powerful media structures and technologies influence people’s daily routines in many respects. Digital media have become embedded into many human activities. This multifaceted media environment calls for a new and critical reflection on the media logic approach in order to include the paradigm shift from curated media to user-generated media content, just to name one of the most decisive parameters of technology change. In an era of technology as “disruption,” we need to ask more precisely where these disruptions occur and how the subsequent changes can be described. Regarding the present media landscape, we can see the integration of media in various social contexts and an increasing complexity of the resulting consequences. So more than ever, this development calls for critical reflections on the idea of a single mass media logic . One major challenge, both for theoretical and empirical perspectives on the concept, is to reflect on the diversity of several media logics at play instead of focusing on one single, mass media –related logic. Overall, a variety of (partly overlapping) media logics seem to be in effect—especially against the backdrop of digitalization and the “power of the internet .”
The ubiquity of the internet and networked media does not only influence people’s communicative practices in their private and professional lives, but media environments themselves are changed, transformed, and further developed by their appropriation in various social and cultural contexts: Human actions redefine and reconfigure the media themselves, another unprecedented technological development. Particularly, social media pose questions as to what the formal and informal rules of digital media formats will develop into (Van Dijck & Poell, 2013). While the internet can empower users to connect with peers and engage as critical consumers or politically active citizens, they also, to some extent, change the media environment by means of their individual actions and interests. At the same time digital media can have critical implications for the formation of a public sphere , as discussed in the course of the filter bubble (Pariser, 2011) or echo chamber effects (Sunstein, 2001; Vaccari, 2012). Furthermore, the internet brings the logics of algorithms and filters into play (Klinger & Svensson, 2015), which are mainly programmed and controlled by commercial organizations and institutions .
Not only the growing importance of platform and networked media, but also the partial loss of relevance of curated mass media content in favor of personalized content, calls for a reflection. The challenge is to describe more precisely what and how the media logic concept can contribute to the understanding of mediatization processes with numerous media technologies, formats and actors blending into one another. Remodeling, adapting, and maybe deepening the concept media logic for the digital age consequently poses an important challenge, in order to better understand the interplay between media and media related institutions . Hence, one of the aims must be a better understanding of mediated social control means in a digital environment of ubiquitous connectivity , all-embracing digital networks and more and more fragmented forms of media usage.
This challenge was taken up by the contributors of this book, who all reflect on the concept of media logics from their specific perspective. Some employ a very critical position; others regard in more detail how the concept should be developed and changed in order to grasp the new role that digital networked media play in people’s lives all over the globe.
1.2 Content of the Book
The v...