Mediatization, polarization, and intolerance (between environments, media, and circulation)

Mediatization and virtuality in human sciences: An announced crossroads 57 bernetic system that transmits information to economic agents, who would, themselves, be thought of ‘as information proces- sors’” (MIROWSKI, apud ibid., p. 84). Now, from this new struc- ture, the more explicit articulation between the phenomenon of mediatization and the type of production that characterizes today’s post-industrial economies would emerge. Redefined by the ideals of information, such economies cannot prescind vis- ibility and circulation any longer as effective communication vectors, establishing the field of production. In other words, since information, as a form of self-reproduction of capital itself, would live from the need for both the intensification of its circu- lation and free exchange, it would necessarily have its predomi- nant way of structuring in the communication bias. Unlike lais- sez-faire , based on an abstentionist attitude, neoliberalism un- dertakes a form of positive power that invests in immaterial pro- duction, in which “more information and more communication mean more productivity, acceleration, and growth” (HAN, 2015, p. 18). In summary, among the novelties of neoliberalism would be what Sodré (2014) calls the organizational dimension of me- diatization. According to him, resulting from the recent hybrid- ism of communication with information, mediatization is the event that inserts it in the center of the administrative ideal of transparency, in which it emerges as an “ideology that mobilizes a new type of workforce, corresponding to the present stage of the production of goods by the global command” (ibid., p. 85). In the scenario in question, therefore, the set of institutions is now based on the vectors of circulation , under the auspices of real time and visibility, in which the grammars of image predomi- nate. In the first case, we speak of the “fusion of telecommu - nications with information technology [which] establishes the dictatorship of real time and the immediacy of responses to the demands of the financial markets” (GAULEJAC, 2007, p. 41); in the second, from injunctions to what would be the effectiveness of the new economic shareholder regime, which makes the “I” a source of voluntary organizational subjection. Both vectors con- stitute the basis of the current production system, in which or- ganizations are guided by operational procedures that improve themselves as economic agents of capital.