PLATFORMS, ALGORITHMS AND AI ISSUES AND HYPOTHESES IN THE MEDIATIZATION PERSPECTIVE Jairo Ferreira Ada Machado Silveira Viviane Borelli Aline Dalmolin Ana Paula da Rosa Isabel Löfgren (Eds.)
This book is one of the results of the V International Seminar onMedia- tization and Social Processes, held in 2022, at UFSM. The e-book edition of the Debate Panels from the V Seminar is available not only at the collection of the project (https://www.midiati com.org/e-books/) but also of FACOS UFSM (http://www.ufsm.br/edito ras/facos/publicacoes/). The works from the WG unfolded in two biblio- graphic productions, available at the OJS platform, with ISBN: a) Expanded abstracts (142): https://midiaticom. org/anais/index.php/seminario-mid iatizacao-resumos/issue/view/16; b) Full articles (33): https://www.midi aticom.org/seminario-midiatizacao/ anais-de-artigos-do-v-seminario/. In five editions, these publications were accessed by 102 thousand research- ers and users worldwide. *** In epistemological, methodological and empirical research terms, the V Seminar adds to the important collection for doctors’, masters’ and undergraduate’s research, besides serving as reference to the interlocu- tions of researchers involved in the research lineage in which it stands, according to what the metrics show: 166 listeners; 119 expositors in 12 working groups; 388 certificates emitted by UFSM/MIDIATICOM. We reiterate our acknowledgement to CAPES, FAPERGS, CNPq and STINT (Sweden) for the financial aid, essential to the viability of this proposal of conversation based on the theoretical and empirical research conducted by its participants. All of this would be impossible without the endorsement of POSCOM and UFSM, and the collective work of the Organizing Committee and Midiaticom. A hug of gratitude.
PLATFORMS, ALGORITHMS AND AI ISSUES AND HYPOTHESES IN THE MEDIATIZATION PERSPECTIVE
UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE SANTA MARIA Rector Vice-rector CCSH Director Communication Sciences Head of Department Luciano Schuch Martha Bohrer Adaim Martha Bohrer Adaim Cristina Marques Gomes Title Platforms, algorithms and AI: issues and hypotheses in the mediatization perspective Editors Jairo Ferreira Ada Machado Silveira Viviane Borelli Aline Dalmolin Ana Paula da Rosa Isabel Löfgren Translation Andrea da Rosa Revision Andrea da Rosa Diagramming Casa Leiria Closing of the edition Jairo Ferreira
FACOS-UFSM Ada Cristina Machado Silveira (UFSM) Eduardo Andres Vizer (UBA) Eugenia Maria M. da Rocha Barrichelo (UFSM) Flavi Ferreira Lisboa Filho (UFSM) Gisela Cramer (UNAL) Maria Ivete Trevisan Fossá (UFSM) Marina Poggi (UNQ) Monica Marona (UDELAR) Paulo Cesar Castro (UFRJ) Sonia Rosa Tedeschi (UEL) Suzana Bleil de Souza (UFRGS) Valdir José Morigi (UFRGS) Valentina Ayrolo (UNMDP) Veneza Mayora Ronsini (UFSM) Editorial Commission Scientific Committee Anne Kaun (Södertörn University) Heike Graf (Södertörn University) Isabel Löfgren (Södertörn University) Michael Forsman (Södertörn University) Mihaela Tudor (Montpellier III) Natália Anselmino (UNR) Stefan Bratosin (Montpellier III) Tiago Quiroga (UNB) Technical Editorial Committee Prof. Dr. Sandra Depexe (UFSM) Prof. Dr. Ricardo Zimmermann Fiegenbaum (UFPEL) Prof. Dr. Mauricio Fanfa (UFSM) Prof. Dr. João Damásio (UFU) Prof. Dr. Joanguete Celestino (UEM-Moçambique/UFSM) Prof. Dr. Hermundes Flores (Unileste) Prof. Dr. Demétrio de Azeredo Soster (UFS) Prof. Dr. Angelo Neckel (Uniasselvi) Dr. Dinis Ferreira Cortes (Midiaticom) Doutorando Jean Silveira Rossi (UFSM) Doutoranda Luisa Schenato Staldoni (Midiaticom) Doutoranda Camila Hartmann (Midiaticom) Ms. William Martins (Midiaticom) Ms. João Vitor da Silva Bitencourt (UFSM) Ms. Alexandra Martins Vieira (UFSM) Graduada Sofia Roratto UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE SANTA MARIA Technical Administrative Committee Prof. Dra. Aline Roes Dalmolin (UFSM) Prof. Dr. Leandro Stevens (UFSM) Prof. Dra. Liliane Dutra Brignol (UFSM) Prof. Dra. Sandra Depexe (UFSM)
Jairo Ferreira Ada Machado Silveira Viviane Borelli Aline Dalmolin Ana Paula da Rosa Isabel Löfgren (Editors) FACOS-UFSM SANTA MARIA-RS 2024 PLATFORMS, ALGORITHMS AND AI ISSUES AND HYPOTHESES IN THE MEDIATIZATION PERSPECTIVE
Platforms, algorithms and AI Issues and hypotheses in the mediatization perspective The present work was carried out with the support from: Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior – Brazil (CAPES) Funding Code 001 Fapergs – process number 22/2551-0001016-4 Stint – Swedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research and Higher Education Cover image: cover created via Freepik (https://www.freepik.com/) This work is licensed with a Creative Commons Licence Attribution-NonComercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR ON RESEARCH ON MEDIATIZATION AND SOCIAL PROCESSES P716 Platforms, algorithms and AI [recurso eletrônico] : issues and hypotheses in the mediatization perspective / editors: Jairo Ferreira … [et al.] ; translation: Andrea da Rosa. – Santa Maria, RS : FACOS-UFSM, [2024]. 1 e-book : il. ISBN 978-65-5773-058-4 1. Mediatization 2. Platforms 3. Algorithms 4. AI I. Ferreira, Jairo II. Rosa, Andrea da CDU 316.77:004.8 Catalog sheet prepared by Lizandra Veleda Arabidian - CRB-10/1492 Biblioteca Central - UFSM
Platforms, algorithms and AI: Issues and hypotheses in the mediatization perspective 9 SUMÁRIO 11 (EPISTEMOLOGICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL) NARRATIVES AND PASSAGES OF MEDIATIZATION Jairo Ferreira 15 FROM SHARED SEMANTICS TO THE EXCAVATIONS OF WHAT OPERATES, CONVERSES AND TRANSFORMS US Jairo Ferreira PART I MEDIATIZATION, TECHNO-DISCURSIVE AND SOCIOSYMBOLIC MUTATIONS 27 PERSPECTIVES AND QUESTIONS ON THE ADVENT OF CULTURAL AND INFORMATION PLATFORMS Bernard Miège 41 CONCEPTUALIZING COMMODIFICATION BIAS IN ALGORITHMIC MODERN NEWS EXCHANGE Ilya Kiriya 59 PLATFORMED INTERACTION IN THE MULTIPOLAR WORLD JOURNALISM, AUTOCRACY, AND DEMOCRACY Ada C. Machado da Silveira 77 ANATOMY OF POLARIZATION AND COMMUNICATIONAL BARBARISM Aline Roes Dalmolin 97 JUST SO YOU CAN’T SAY I DIDN’T MENTION THE CLOUDS: SOCIO-TECHNICAL IMAGINARIES OF THE LAND OF THE TWISTED ANGELS AND SOME PLANETARY CONSIDERATIONS FOR MEDIATIZATION Isabel Löfgren 129 POST-MIGRANT VOICES AT TIMES OF HYPER-VISIBILITY Heike Graf 155 MEDIA PROCESSES: TRANSFORMATIONS OF RELIGIOUS DISCOURSE IN THE CONTEXT OF ALGORITHMIZATION Pedro Gilberto Gomes
PART II MEDIATIZAÇÃO, CIRCULATION AND COMMUNICATION 171 CIRCULATION: FROM THE PASSAGE ZONE TO THE AMBIANCE OF INTERPENETRATIONS OF MEANINGS Antônio Fausto Neto 201 THE THEORETICAL-METHODOLOGICAL PROBLEMATIZATION IN CIRCULATION AND PLATFORM RESEARCH Viviane Borelli 223 IN THE IMAGE AND LIKENESS: MACHINE, MAN, AND IMAGINARIES IN CIRCULATION Ana Paula da Rosa 247 MEDIATIZATION, CIRCULATION AND SOCIAL SEMIOSIS: REFERENCES FOR CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF PLATFORMS AND ALGORITHMS Jairo Ferreira 269 ON HYPERMEDIATIZATION AS A PROCESS AND HYPERMEDIATIZED SOCIETIES AS AN OUTCOME. A NON-ANTHROPOCENTRIC APPROACH Mario Carlón 297 WE HAVE NEVER BEEN MEDIATIZED: REFLECTIONS ON THE RELATIONS BETWEEN LATIN AMERICAN AND EUROPEAN APPROACHES TO MEDIATIZATION Göran Bolin 311 COMMUNICATION AND MIDIATIZATION BETWEEN GODS ANDMEN Lucrécia D´Alessio Ferrara 329 INTERACTIONAL DIGITAL ALGORITHM José Luiz Braga 351 INDEX 359 ABOUT THE AUTHORS
11 (Epistemological and methodological) narratives and passages of mediatization Jairo Ferreira This book is made in major transitions of the Seminar on Mediatization project. It is the result of a Seminar held at the POSCOM UFSM, after having been carried out, for four editions, at the PPGCC UNISINOS. This transition was built by several ac- tors (consolidated researchers, young researchers, and dozens of researchers in training), teaching and research institutions (especially UFSM and Unisinos), including the generosity of the research agencies involved (Capes, Fapergs, and CNPq) in adjusting processes, authorizations, and resources to the new cir- cumstances. Actors in collectives with their autopoietic ways of softening being, illuminating the desire to forge the common in the construction of knowledge, adding to memory strong pinch- es that it is worthwhile. In particular, it would be impossible without the empathy, welcome, and engagement of the professors of POSCOM- UFSM, especially the co-editors Ada Machado da Silveira, Aline Dalmolin, and Viviane Borelli, the coordinator of the PPG, Liliane Dutra Brignol, and other professors who received the project with affection, with the marks of shared origins in an academic and cultural path in Rio Grande do Sul. A moment that deserves narratives that situate, in times and spaces, the strong interac- tions, which have saved decades-long epistemological and meth- odological investments in the production of knowledge, of this line of research entitled Mediatization and Social Processes. Recognition to the solidary, students and professors from Unisi- nos who continued to bet on the project, “in spite of you”, in particular those who did not allow silence to be dominated by uncertainty, who engaged in the “this will pass.” To the research-
Jairo Ferreira 12 ers, lecturers, who adapted to the new directions, in a joyful and intense way. ** The theme of the V Seminar on Research on Mediati- zation and Social Processes is a social phenomenon evidenced in practices and discourses of various actors and institutions: platforms, datafication, algorithms, artificial intelligence, appli- cations and their interfaces. As in previous editions, the object of the Seminar is to reflect on the theme from the perspective of mediatization as a way of looking at media processes, ques- tioning, in these processes, what is specifically communication- al. With this, other approaches to the theme are not excluded. There are lineages in the field of communication that approach it from other perspectives, in addition to mediatization. There is research in various areas of knowledge about it – i.e., economics, law, social sciences, psychology, data science – that has also been welcomed into the interdisciplinary debate. The central questions of the V Seminar aimed to reflect on the following questions: What is communicational when we investigate platforms, datafication, algorithms, artificial intelli- gence, applications and their interfaces?What is the relationship between the communication observed there and the mutations in media processes? Does this mutation demand new epistemes in the research line Mediatization and Social Processes? What are the epistemological and methodological shifts suggested by the “north” and “south” strands for the understanding of these mutations? In their interfaces, what do these epistemological and methodological approaches reveal beyond the social dis- courses on the proposed theme * ? * The Seminar was developed, according to the already consolidated program format, in two levels: Debate Panels and Working Groups. Each debate panel (five tables) included the presence of three researchers: one foreigner, one national and one from the promoting institutions (UFSM, executor, and Unisi- nos, collaborator). Each session, of Panels and Working Groups, took place over a period of three hours, between presenta- tions and debates, including questions from participants (audi-
The narratives and passages (epistemological and methodological) of mediatization 13 ence), with simultaneous or consecutive translation, depending on specificity. The schedule of the Panels of the V Seminar and its structure can be seen at https://www.midiaticom.org/ seminario-midiatização/program-2022/. The Working Groups (WGs) were formed with the presence of researchers, doctors and doctoral students, mas- ters and master’s students, graduates and undergraduates who had expanded abstracts approved according to the ongo- ing call. The papers were submitted in Portuguese, English and Spanish, via the OJS form, with authorship data inaccessible to the reviewers, with rules and guidelines, schedule and edito- rial processes. They were evaluated by a team of reviewers that includes students and master’s students invited to register in the system. ** This book is one of the results of the V International Seminar on Research on Mediatization and Social Processes, held in 2022 at UFSM. The e-book edition of the Debate Panels of the V Seminar is available not only in the project’s collection (https://www.midiaticom.org/e-books/), but also of FACOS- UFSM (https://www.ufsm.br/editoras/facos/publicacoes/). The work of the WGs unfolded into two bibliographic produc- tions, available on the OJS platform, with ISBN: Expanded ab- stracts (142): https://midiaticom.org/anais/ index.php/seminar-mediatization-abstracts/issue/view/16; b) Full articles (33): https://www.midiaticom.org/seminario-mediatization/ annals-of-articles-of-the-v-seminar/. In five editions, these publications were accessed by 102 thousand researchers and users worldwide. ** In epistemological, methodological and empirical re- search terms, the V Seminar adds to the important collection for the research of doctoral students, master’s students and under- graduates, in addition to being a reference for the interlocutions of the researchers involved in the line of research in which it is located, as evidenced by its metrics: 166 listeners; 119 exhibi- tors in 12 Working Groups; 388 certificates issued by UFSM/ Midiaticom.
Jairo Ferreira 14 We reiterate our acknowledgments to Capes, Fapergs, CNPq and Stint (Sweden) for the financial support, which is es- sential for the feasibility of this proposal for conversation based on theoretical and empirical research carried out by its participants. All this would be impossible without the endorsement of POSCOM and UFSM, and the collective work of the Organizing Committee and Midiaticom. A hug of gratitude. Jairo Ferreira By the Organizing Committee and Midiaticom
15 From shared semantics to the excavations of what operates, converses and transforms us Jairo Ferreira The semantics of the platform, algorithm and AI ac- company the reflections of the books published on Midiaticom since the last decade. A set of reflections was developed in the Capes-School of Higher Studies project entitled Mediatization, Technique and Information and Communication Technologies, with the presence of Bernard Miège (2016), Serge Proulx (2016) and Patrice Flichy (2016). In this set of publications, carried out with the participation of dozens of professors and students of the former PPGCC-UNISINOS, the Network that was beginning to be cultivated sought elaborations on platforms and algo- rithms in a conjuncture (from 2010 onwards) in the perspective of mediatization. In the published texts, there are indications of a conjuncture of undifferentiation between platforms and socio- digital networks, which is evidenced in the repeated use of the term socio-digital platforms in the three books published in 2016 (https://www.midiaticom.org/e-books/). The relationships between platforms and algorithms appear when: the authors address issues of regulation and impulse of sign and discursive offers, including inferences about the barriers to circulation arising from algorithms. Reflection on artificial intelligence has not yet appeared in this discussion. On the other hand, there is a reflection on social intelligence, or specifically on collective intelligence (in a critical way), still in the wake of the debates originated in Pierre Lévy and Kerckhove (1999). The platform is already seen as a means of technologi- cal innovation at new levels of the commodification of informa-
Jairo Ferreira 16 tion and communication, expansion of media power and transnationalization of flows, concentrating on what would come o constitute the large Western and Chinese groups today (Miège, 2016), resulting in an always updated reflection on regulation, including the consideration of the transformations of the rela- tions between public and private space. Patrice Flichy (2016) is central to the hypotheses and formulations about amateurs. On the one hand, Flichy brings us to think about the relations between social imaginary (not re- stricted to elites, intellectuals and specialists) and media processes, insofar as it gives meaning and organizes practices, in- tegrating utopia and ideology at the same time – crossing the processes of technological innovation, being open to possibilities, conversations and social constructions. On the other hand, Flichy situates the individual in search of their identity, which is realized in new production collectives – and hence the maxim: internet, a world for amateurs. This formulation about individu- als and collectives of production has explorable analogies close to Eliseo Verón’s proposition about the construction of collectives from the circulation of meaning that is condensed in the interactions between actors. These axes of reflection are complementary, even if contradictory, but not necessarily antagonistic – thus, we can observe the relations between the large corporations that domi- nate the networks and the infinity of platforms activated by groups and collectives built and still constructing their identi- ties, which at the time were considered amateurs, and which, currently, we can consider to constitute new forms of specialists and professionalization. Proulx’s (2016) contributions add new perceptions about this process, with his reflections on the gift of users (based on the anthropological theory of gift), in tension with the capture of data and agency that produce uses conditioned by the logics of the environment in which the user is inscribed, leading to adaptive directions of culture and behavior through the me- diation of recognition in comments, enjoyments and other signs. In this moment of reflection, the algorithm is still unknown, as it even poses the challenge of approaching the phe- nomenon from a specifically communicational perspective:
From shared semantics to the excavations of what operates, converses and transforms us 17 There is a whole work to be done to try to deconstruct what constitutes the interfaces; that is, to enter the guts of the interfaces, to go deeper, to get the algorithms, the computer codes, the software. I think it is a work that requires the collaboration not only of sociologists and communication spe- cialists, but also of specialists in the world of information technology and, strictly speaking, the participation of mathematicians. I think we need interdisciplinary teams to work in the guts of the social web (Proulx et al., 2016, p. 38). This does not prevent Proulx from asking questions and offering answers about what algorithms are, linking this to the informational capitalism, approaching hypotheses that would be developed theoretically during the 10s of this century. Therefore, there are not few contributions of these works in terms of inference: • Expansion and concentration of media power, now at the global level, beyond the national frameworks of television corporations; • Capture of the free work of billions of users on the planet; • Data capture as a source of capitalization; • Adaptive processes in behavioral and discursive terms to the contexts of the media of networked interaction; • Regulation of the discursive and interactional flow by algorithms; • Emergence of new collectives of resistance and cultural production. ** The inferences above indicate transformations in so- cio-anthropological processes correlated to media processes, addressing the phenomena of platforms and algorithms. In these books, there is no reference to the term artificial intelligence. By taking up platforms, algorithms and artificial intelligence as a theme, the VI Mediatization Seminar sought new approximating
Jairo Ferreira 18 inferences regarding the phenomena (social practices and discourses about these practices, from actors and institutions) and the epistemological approaches suggested, particularly about what is communicational in it, considering it as a mutation in media processes and whether this mutation demands new epis- temes in the research line Mediatization and Social Processes, differentiating epistemological and methodological displacements suggested by the “North” and “South” strands for the un- derstanding of these mutations. This book is a sample of interlocutions between the South and the North in research on mediatization, matured in these six seminars. They indicate advances towards the aware- ness of a point of differentiation and connection between epistemologies. Without the intension of exhaustion, we highlight axes of approximations and differentiation. One of the zones of differentiation is mediatization from the perspective of circulation and social semiosis, founded by Eliseo Verón. There are no strong references to the theories of signs in the perspectives of the north. This absence can be observed in the institutionalist current (in which Stig Hjarvard is a researcher of international reference) and in the sociocon- structivist currents (e.g., Couldry & Hepp, 2020). The currents of the north, when they approach the phenomenon of language, refer to discourse in a generic way, in an approach that often precedes discourse theories, semiotics, or even structural semiology. On the other hand, the issue of circulation (strong in the south strands) appears, in the texts of researchers from the north in a more generic way, without the intense and complex problematization observed in the southern currents (Fausto Neto, Ana Paula da Rosa, Viviane Borelli, Mario Carlón, and Jairo Ferreira), including the relationship between code, circulation and de-circulation (Aline Dalmolin). In this book, Göran Bolin’s chapter is a work of interlocution around these axes (sign and circulation), or even of referencing (as in Dalmolin, when she brings Braga’s thought to formulate her reflections). This ap- proach, still embryonic, is a good achievement of the Seminars on Mediatization. On the other hand, if the reflection on media, institu- tions, and actors is strong in Northern perspectives, it is also
From shared semantics to the excavations of what operates, converses and transforms us 19 present in Southern approaches (see, for example, Verón’s model, 1997). Unlike the semantics of sign, semiotics, semiology, dis- course and circulation, points of differentiation, media, institu- tions, and actors are approximate. It is not by chance that the semantics of technology is almost consensually present in the relations, regarding the con- cept of media and institutions or not, referring to socio-technology (Bernard Miège, Ada Silveira and Isabel Löfgren), much more than to semio-technics (as it appears in Jairo Ferreira). The institutional semantics, present in Verón’s models, appears strong in Fausto Neto’s elaboration. Perhaps the seminar resents the absence of “pure” institutionalist representatives, aiming to emulate conversation. In other words, it is another operator that can perhaps be explored in the interlocutions between currents from the north and the south, as it is in the works of the Seminar on Mediatization. But it is incomplete to claim that the south is reduced to Verón’s perspective, when he thinks about the construction of a lineage in mediatization. This book expresses this through two important operators: ambiance and communication. Ambiance is the focus of Pedro Gilberto Gomes’ research work and should be seen in its power through the interlocution with the socioconstructivist approach (the term is also the object of reflection in Göran Bolin’s chapter) and is transversal to most of the chap- ters of this book. The south is also a space for questioning the limits and potentialities of lineage, especially when discussing what com- munication is. The word communication is common in the writings of communication, and this is evident here as well. But the term is the object of specific reflections in this book, represent- ing a strong characteristic in Brazil (in the chapters of José Luiz Braga and Lucrécia Ferrara), offering clues for elaborations to advance in the Seminars on Mediatization. Finally, we have the proposition that mediatization is an epistemology for the understanding of social construction and its logics. These terms are also transversal to most of the chapters of this book. Undoubtedly, they deserve specific works of singularization and reflection, as bridges of interlocution be- tween research programs from the north and the south. And, in
Jairo Ferreira 20 some chapters, they are central to the interpretation of media phenomena (Heike Graf, Fausto Neto and Jairo Ferreira). ** The systematization exercise above indicates a path to the discovery of points of reflection. It is not exhaustive. Howev- er, it already offers us a set of potential, epistemological relationships, with inevitable methodological developments, which may not allow the dichotomy between epistemologies of the north and the south when it comes to the lineage of mediatization and social processes. This is very interesting and deserves further reflection, including because it affects the “flags” of epistemolo- gies from the Global South in strain with epistemologies from the north. It will undoubtedly be the subject of conversations and debates in the Research Network on Mediatization and So- cial Processes. On the other hand, it is evident that research in media- tization in the south is also developed with contributions from the north; the reverse is not yet evident if we consider this book as a sample to be verified in a wider population of articles on on- going mediatization. This configuration unfolds in the way this book is organized. The tables of the Seminar on Mediatization were reorganized by affinities and epistemological interlocu- tions, which are not unidimensional blocks. In the first part, entitled Mediatization, Techno-discursive and Socio-symbolic Mutations, the epistemological perspec- tives can be differentiated into interfaces that are in dialogue with a problematization that does not accentuate semiosis as an epistemology of interpretation of media processes, but is closer to the theory of media and its social appropriations, while also referring to problems of the “south”. This part begins with those who characterize the me- dia field itself (Miège and Kiriya) in its connections with capi- talism. Miège and Kiriya update reflections to understand that platforms, algorithms, and artificial intelligence are contem- porary phenomena that are inseparable from capitalism, from the historicity of the media, with their configurations unfolded in the media field. Kiriya unfolds this perspective in a conver- gent way with an interesting reflection on the commoditization
From shared semantics to the excavations of what operates, converses and transforms us 21 of journalism. The chapters by Ada Silveira and Aline Dalmolin share the concept of semiosphere as a concept of passage to think about mediatization, in interface with Fausto Neto’s and Bragas’s concepts of circulation and circuit. The texts by Isabel Löfgren and Heike Graf are based on European references, with repeated use of semantics as means in their reflections for the understanding of contemporary cultural conflicts. The chapter by Pedro Gilberto Gomes closes this part of the book in which mediatization is thought of with considerations about technolo- gy and the media, to think about a central cultural phenomenon in the contemporary – religion. In the second part (Mediatization, Circulation and Communication), the problematization of this relationship – social processes and media processes – remains, but the suggested epistemological and methodological approaches are made in affirmations or more systematic questioning and reflections on circulation as an interposed object for understanding this, when platforms, algorithms and artificial intelligence are investigated. It begins with Fausto Neto’s in-depth text on circulation from the current inaugurated by Eliseo Verón, in which he asks pro- ductive questions for us to think about the platforms beyond the functionalist propensities updated in many current studies. The methodological works by Viviane Borelli and Ana Paula da Rosa complement this perspective. Jairo Ferreira updates his elaborations on mediatization and platforms in dialogue with the currents from the south, accentuating the discussion of se- miosis based on the concept of logics in Peirce. The two final dyads add quality to this part. One, the dialogue in development between Göran Bolin and Mario Carlón, therefore between the socio-constructivist perspectives of the north and the semio-an- thropological one, in an explicit way in the texts. We close with the historical dyad, a silent conversation between Lucrécia Ferr- ara and José Luiz Braga, questioning mediatization based on the fruitful search for what communication is. ** A reading guide for this book can perhaps be the re- turn, as questions, to the propositions with which we began this introduction. To what extent do the approaches developed al-
Jairo Ferreira 22 low us to understand, from the perspective of mediatization: the expansion and concentration of media power, now at the global level, beyond the national frameworks of television cor- porations; considering very current phenomena such as the regulation of these platforms seen as social parameters of in- formation and communication? How is the free work of billions of users and the collection of data on the planet accentuated, transforming economic, political and cultural relations? How have our behaviors been adapting to the forms of interaction and discourse on platforms, and the agency of algorithms and artificial intelligence? What are the promises and possibilities brought by the new actors and collectives of resistance and net- worked cultural production on platforms, including social uses of algorithms and AI? ** The cover of this book is an AI “work” (created via Freepik). It is not a response to an image request about artificial intelligence. The request was different: the nervous system. The displacement is affirmative. Human intelligence is not an isolat- ed device of the body, but a connective mediation, in its multiple nervous functions, between the environment and what we are and can be. References COULDRY, N.; HEPP, A. A construção mediada da realidade. São Leopoldo: Unisinos, 2020. 346 p. FLICHY, Patrice; FERREIRA, Jairo; AMARAL, Adriana (ed.). Re- des digitais: um mundo para os amadores. Novas rela- ções entre mediadores, mediações e midiatizações. Santa Maria: FACOS - UFSM, 2016. 284 p. KERCKHOVE, Derick. Inteligencia en conexión: hacia una socie- dad de la web. Barcelona: Gedisa Editorial, 1999. 256 p. MIÈGE, Bernard; FERREIRA, Jairo; FAUSTO NETO, Antonio; BIT- TENCOURT, M. C. J. A. (ed.). Operações demidiatização:das máscaras da convergência às críticas ao tecnodeter- mi- nismo. Santa Maria: FACOS-UFSM, 2016. 346 p.
From shared semantics to the excavations of what operates, converses and transforms us 23 PROULX, Serge; FERREIRA, Jairo; ROSA, Ana Paula da (ed.). Midiatização e redes digitais: os usos e as apropriações en- tre a dádiva e os mercados. Santa Maria: FACOS-UFSM, 2016. 282 p. VERÓN, Eliseo Esquema para el análisis de la mediatización. In: Diálogos de la Comunicación, Lima: Felafacs, n. 48, 1997.
25 PART I MEDIATIZATION, TECHNODISCURSIVE AND SOCIO-SYMBOLIC MUTATIONS
27 Perspectives and questions on the advent of cultural and information platforms1 Perspectivas e questionamentos sobre o advento das plataformas culturais e de informação La médiatisation actualisée (suite): Regards et interrogations sur l’avènement des plateformes culturelles et informationnelles Bernard Miège2 Abstract: This contribution expands the previous works pro- posed by the author in the context of previous sessions of this same Seminar. In advance, it specifies three methodological principles that underlie the approach described as socio-sym- bolic. It then discusses and attempts to characterize the notion of platform oftenmentioned today, showing that it is part of both the discontinuity and the continuity of a number of social logics of information-communication that have arisen previously. And, with the help of recent or ongoing work, it proposes a certain number of issues in the relations that they maintain/will main- tain with the cultural industries (and by extension the informa- tion industries), accentuating the heterogeneity observable in 1 Paper presented at the V Seminário Internacional de Pesquisas emMidiatização e Processos Sociais. Poscom-UFSM. Santa Maria, RS. Funding support: Capes/ PAEP, Stint, FAPERGS. Execution: UFSM. Collaboration: Unisinos. 2 Professor emeritus of Information and Communication Sciences. GRE- SEC, Uni- versité Grenoble Alpes. Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1704-0773 E-mail: bernard.miege@gmail.com
Bernard Miège 28 the situations, including the growing diversity of modalities and the necessary inscription in territories. Keywords: digital giants; cultural industries; informational in- dustries; informationalization (datafication); intermediation; mediatization; digitization; platform. Resumo: Esta contribuição amplia trabalhos prévios propos- tos pelo autor no contexto de sessões anteriores deste mesmo Seminário. De antemão, especifica três princípios metodoló- gicos que fundamentam a abordagem, descritos como socios- simbólicos. Em seguida, discute e tenta caracterizar a noção de plataforma frequentemente mencionada hoje, mostrando em particular que ela faz parte tanto da descontinuidade quanto da continuidade de um certo número de lógicas sociais de informação-comunicação que surgiram anteriormente. E, com a ajuda de trabalhos recentes ou em curso, propõe um certo nú- mero de questões nas relações que mantêm/irão manter com as indústrias culturais (e por extensão as indústrias da informa- ção), acentuando a heterogeneidade observável nas situações, incluindo a crescente diversidade das modalidades e a necessária inscrição em territórios. Palavras-chave: gigantes digitais; indústrias culturais; indús- trias informacionais; informacionalização (datificação); inter- mediação; midiatização; digitalização; plataforma. Résumé: La présente contribution prolonge des travaux anté- rieurs proposés par l’auteur dans le cadre de précédentes ses- sions du même Séminaire. En préalable il précise trois principes méthodologiques qui sont au fondement de son approche, qua- lifiée de socio-symbolique. Puis, il discute et s’efforce de caracté- riser la notion de plateforme aujourd’hui souvent évoquée, mon- trant notamment qu’elle s’inscrit à la fois en discontinuité et en continuité avec un certain nombre de logiques sociales de l’in- formation- communication apparues antérieurement. Et à l’aide de travaux récents ou en cours, il propose un certain nombre de questionnements dans les relations qu’elles entretiennent/ entretiendront avec les industries culturelles (et par extension les industries informationnelles), insistant sur l’hétérogénéité observable des situations, la diversité croissante des modalités et l’inscription nécessaire dans les territoires.
Perspectives and questions on the advent of cultural and information platforms 29 Mots clé: géants du numérique; industries culturelles; industries informationnelles; informationnalisation (datification); intermé- diation; médiatisation; numérisation; plateforme. 1. Introduction Unquestionably, research and publications on the phenomenon of platforms are multiplying and it is difficult to draw up a reasoned and up-to-date assessment. This efferves- cence can be explained because, almost everywhere, researchers became aware of the importance of the phenomenon only late. However, this does not justify focusing attention only on the big platforms and, particularly, on those developed in different continents by the American Big Five and other groups such as Netflix or Disney, as well as on their Chinese competitors, such as TikTok, without linking the observations and conclusions to previous developments in mediatized communication, however important and decisive may be the current mutations observ- able from the second decade of this century. To avoid these gaps and to advance in the well-founded understanding of the current position of platforms, and espe- cially those mainly centered in the spheres of culture and information, I must, first, put this contribution in the continuity of my previous interventions in this Seminar. 2. Reminders and foreplay The approach I propose to mediatization – a concept with plural and therefore ambiguous meanings – can be de- scribed as socio-symbolic; it fundamentally differs from other approaches, particularly from the semio-anthropological approach (of the organizers of the Seminar) and, obviously, from the views of “common sense”. It insists on the fact that digital techniques are socio-technical devices that are objects of a social construction, which varies according to the countries and regions of the world (hence the importance to be given to social strategies and practices), in a temporality to be specified. And, in doing so, it helps to identify the modes of production of the
Bernard Miège 30 meaning of the products offered and the mutations of the discursive spaces themselves, in renewed conditions. What char- acterizes the current management of infocommunicational phe- nomena by the digital giants is the fact that it is based on data and uses algorithms, which influences infocommunicational phenomena in several ways. In the Information and Communication Sciences (it is opportunistic to highlight this disciplinary link because cur- rently other disciplines in the humanities and social sciences are interested in digital phenomena, but limiting themselves to their own approaches that are far from measuring the phenomena of infocommunication, and their specificities), as I considered in a recent work dedicated to the digitization of societies (Miège, 2020), it seems appropriate and relevant to base it on three principles 1 : . Taking into account temporalities (long and short), which allows not only to understand (technically based) innovations, but to distinguish them from mutations (e.g. affecting the media) and changes (e.g. related to behaviors that are obviously less sustainable than social practices). 2. Medium-range theorizing, both at the micro and macro levels, relating to both empirical observa- tions and hypothetical-deductive considerations. Therefore, caution must be exercised in relation to claims to the universality of the phenomena con- sidered; the social logics of communication remain situated, and emerge from research and analysis, from which we explain many of the perceived dif- ferences between what can be observed in Europe and in South America. 3. The multidimensionality of approaches. As far as possible, and to protect ourselves from the risks of compartmentalization of work, we should avoid remaining at a single level of analysis. For example, with regard to the cultural and creative industries that will be central to the rest of this Presentation, it is appropriate to articulate the different phases
Perspectives and questions on the advent of cultural and information platforms 31 of the cycle: from creation to production, then to intermediation, distribution, dissemination and con- sumption, and, therefore, not being satisfied with conclusions that only affect the creation phase or the reactions of the different categories of users. This is a principle often difficult to apply, but which should nevertheless help to place the conclusions reached. It is therefore appropriate to exercise caution in rela- tion to claims to the universality of the phenomena under consideration; the social logics of communication, which emerge from research and analysis, remain situated. These three methodological principles (considering temporalities, medium-range theorizing, and multidimensional- ity of approaches) must be maintained whatever the infocom- municational phenomena considered. Most of the time, it is necessary to “agitate” the approaches adapted each time to the issues analyzed, although it is relevant to always use common or similar methodological principles. An example: the media coverage of the global health crisis that we are still experiencing. If we consider what has been proposed, from different angles of analysis (which is demonstrated by the works on it that are just beginning to be pub- lished), it is interesting to “apply” the principles mentioned above to it. For my part, during a conference organized in Madrid at the end of 2022, this led me to highlight the following developments (Miège, 2022): • The preeminence and even omnipresence of political communication; • Constant confusion in public discourse between the scientific space and the sanitary space; • And, as expected, the call for data-driven quantifi- cation in crisis management, which strengthened support for platform development. It is on this last and decisive aspect that we must now concentrate, but this time regarding the cultural and informa- tion industries.
Bernard Miège 32 3. Platform, a concept to be discussed and yet to be characterized That is why it is important to be cautious about claims to the universality of the phenomena considered; the social log- ics of communication, which emerge from research and analysis, remain situated. Paradoxically, the platforms (hereinafter PF) are as- sociated among specialists with: 1° advanced capitalist devel- opment, in reference to the large PF organized by digital companies that dominate markets on an almost globalized scale (the Big Five and other more or less allied groups, on the one hand, BATX3, on the other) giving rise to, what some even call the phase of capitalism, “PF capitalism”; and 2° a method that allows participatory financing and, therefore, sharing: as is the case with crowdfunding. This modality, far from being the first, has certainly contributed to improving the image of PF, an image that is also greatly compromised by the deliberately anti-wage practices of PF home delivery, such as Deliveroo. It should be noted that PF today covers very diverse modalities, which do not allow a simple or even single definition to be given. From the point of view of the digital techniques that are in some way at the base of PF, we can consider that what is constitutive of these same PFs is in some way a variable set of a plurality of techniques (today moving towards what is referred to as artificial intelligence, i.e., the 2nd generation digital). Due to this variability and this plurality of techniques implemented, PFs cannot be considered radical innovations, they are linked to type 2 innovations, or product innovations, and more precisely to incremental innovations to which a multiplicity of changes usually contribute. But these characteristics are not enough to characterize the platforms. It therefore seems to me necessary to insist on the fol- lowing three essential observations: 3 BATX stands for Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent and Xiomi, the acronym for the four largest technology companies in China (retrieved from: https://pt.wikipedia. org/wiki/BATX)
Perspectives and questions on the advent of cultural and information platforms 33 1. If the term is old, it was used in completely different senses (related to planning, geography, or political and trade union life). Apparently, it is the management economists, notably Andrei Hagiu, who seem to have been among the first ones, just over ten years ago, to be interested in the term, particularly to consider the activity of workers in the digital economy, as well as sharing (in other words, the shared economy), both made possible by new digital resources. To this strictly managerial perspective were added works relating to politi- cal philosophy, notably those well known by Nick Srnicek on "platform capitalism", as well as Patrice Flichy's proposals describing new forms of work and focusing on showing that individualism is now increasingly connected to technology. 2. It is important to note that platforms do not arise ex nihilo; the activities they perform and "organize" correspond very precisely to activities that have already been organized before (for some sometimes a century ago), in the context of which we have des- ignated them (cf. Miège, 2015) as logics of social infocommunication; thus, the PF mobilizes more particularly the following social logics that should be recalled here without being able to detail their modalities: • Informationalization, a process today more commonly referred to by the more restrictive term datafication; • Individualization and strong differentiation of (communicational, informative and cultural) practices; • The progressive transnationalization of cultural and information products; • Correlatively, thegrowing industrializationof cul- ture, information and especially communication; • Leading to a strengthened, but still conflictual articulation between industries, networks, ma-
Bernard Miège 34 terials and content – favored (accelerated) by the widespread use of digital techniques; • And, finally, the increasingly observable pri- macy of the intermediation function, very likely to be included in the appropriation of the value produced (many authors have insisted on this fundamental aspect, but without being able to give a quantified estimate). 3. As widespread as it is today, the algorithmic pro- cessing of producer/consumer, seller/customer relations, as well as managers/directed, elected/ voters, managers/participants, is not open to ques- tioning and criticism, the main ones being: • The secrecy of the procedures, the absence of recognized ethical rules and the non-pub- lication and discussion of the results (even more than before, with the classic marketing techniques). • Another observation should be added: during periods of sanitary confinement, the large dominant platforms have been able to skillfully offer their stocks of audiovisual products (as well as new films produced quickly) and to bet on changes in uses (moving towards non-linear television consumption) in order to quickly gain market shares. This strategy, as three au- thors point out, "[...] perhaps leads to an overes- timation of their influence in the media ecosystem. It would therefore be important to docu- ment the production and consumption prac- tices that characterize other video-on-demand platforms" (Thoër, Boisvert & Niemeyer, 2022, p. 30). Let us add that this observation can cer- tainly be extended to most of the products of the different sectors of the cultural industry. • The monopolization and processing of data by groups and companies, as well as by States, in a monopoly situation, as is reflected, for instance,
Perspectives and questions on the advent of cultural and information platforms 35 in the recent reactions to TikTok (FebruaryMarch 2023). • The considerable bias in the processing (name- ly due to the methods of data collection – their abundance in no way guarantees the validity and representativeness of the results obtained – and the successive choices left only to the experts). • In addition – third series of questions and criti- cisms – the regular and very systematic work of persuasion and conviction directed to consumers/users, about the supposed superiority of these methods of data collection of all kinds, highlighting the contribution of these same users-consumers. 4. Cultural and informative platforms: proposals for the analysis of their position(s) As indicated in the introduction, here and there, surveys and research work are ongoing, and some have already been completed. And journals with international influence begin to publish articles, most often related to strategies implemented in certain sectors or on partial aspects. We will stick here to the following three propositions: 1st proposition: the heterogeneity of situations: This is the conclusion in which two authors of a work focused on the issue insist: The place occupied by these platforms is far from being uniform in all territories and [...] does not extend in the same way to all cultural sectors. They cannot be understood as an undifferentiated whole, just as the strategies of cultural industry actors regarding the development of these platforms are notable for their heterogeneity (Thuilas & Wiart, 2023, p. 146). This results in the embarrassment already observed in the face of the very ambiguous term “platformization”, which
Bernard Miège 36 poorly reflects the diversity of strategies of the different actors involved and of the activities now managed by the PF, special- ized or general. 2nd Proposition: No reduction of platform intervention to the platforms of large U.S. companies, however dominant it may be: It is this perspective that is at the heart of a research program, PARADICC, which is still ongoing, whose leaders, Vin- cent Bullich and Laurie Schmitt, present the issues (both cre- ation and mediation and territorial inscription) and report them in these terms, refusing to continue: […] as if intermediation were the only relevant step and could work independently of the previ- ous steps. However, it is precisely this trap that we want to avoid by adopting a cross-cutting approach from the outset. It is a matter of thinking of this action of the platforms as integrated into a broader chain of cooperation; the study must comprise in the same movement the strategies of the actors who have deliberately chosen to articulate a potentially global diffusion of their content and a territorial inscription of their activity (Bullich and Schmitt, 2022, unpublished text). 3rd proposal: the necessary registration of platforms in the territories: Consecutively, in relation to the previous proposals and to clarify the approach to cultural and creative PF that is begin- ning to be developed here and there, I will also add the elements of analysis taken from a paper presented at the recent Conference on Public Spaces and Africa (Université Lyon 2, November- December 2022) by Cameroonian academic Nicanor Tatchim: Among the innovative initiatives [...] Kiro’o works on politicization through video games of categories taken from the political game; Stillac Play and Cinaf TV bring, respectively, Camaroonian and African music and cinema to the international scene. All these platforms attempt to build a new perspective on the continent by promoting Africa’s rich cultural diversity (Tatchim, 2022, unpublished text).
Perspectives and questions on the advent of cultural and information platforms 37 Let us add that these PFs are of interest to both expatriates and locals; it is a condition of its viability. *** For more than a century, cultural and informational products have resulted from the often competitive and therefore conflictual, but ultimately more or less negotiated, “encounter” between the strategies of actors whose interests are far from al- ways convergent: namely, 1. the strategies of the main communication industries, now overtaken by the promoters of the large digital platforms; 2. the strategies of disseminators, producers or editors of content and, subsequently, the contributions of artists, intellectuals and information specialists, to the conception or creation of this same content; 3. structuring trends in cultural and informational practices and, particularly, in the expansion of com- mercial consumption; 4. what is produced by technical changes and innova- tions, and particularly by the uses resulting from technical means; and 5. the activities of reception, appropriation and re- interpretation of content by the recipients, i.e., consumers. This scheme could be presented in a more reasoned way, but it essentially sheds light on the ongoing changes in me- dia coverage of infocultural phenomena and remains relevant even if it has become more complex. Many (e.g., among digital ideologues or experts in digital humanities) hoped that, with the development of digital techniques, this would represent the end of this standard; and there was indeed an evolution to- wards (more) direct relationships between creators and users, but much more decisive was the interposition of the Digital Giants, mainly, but not exclusively in the intermediation phase. This intervention took place quickly and even brutally, favored by the fascination linked to digital technology, as well as the virtual absence of regulatory measures (in Europe, but also other
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjEzNzYz