Читать книгу Facebook - Taina Bucher - Страница 8

Invoking the feeling of Facebook, of its felt presence, confronts its alleged status as a social network site, social medium or platform. The memory of having to pose for your parents’ Facebook-friendly photos, or, as one of the speakers at an arts festival told the audience, the experience of ‘not being able to visit a new city without searching for the perfect new vertical cover photo for Facebook’, suggests that the question of what Facebook is and why it matters cannot be answered adequately by referring back to other high-order labels. The way in which Facebook touches the lives of so many, whether this touching is barely noticed or significantly sensed, attests to its atmospheric force. This book suggests that one of the ways in which we might understand Facebook is through notions of atmosphere, affect and imaginaries. More colloquially, atmosphere is used to describe the ambiance or feel of a place.

Scholars in human geography have taken up the term from Gernot Böhme’s writings on aesthetics (1993) as a way of theorizing the unique backdrop of everyday life (Anderson, 2009). According to Bille et al., atmospheres refer to the ‘spatial experience of being attuned in and through the material world’ (2015: 35). It’s a feeling of in-betweenness that cannot readily be attributed to either an object or subject, but needs to be thought of as something that emerges in an encounter between people and things and seems to fill a space with a certain tone or mood. What Jace is describing when he recounts growing up and posing for Facebook photos is essentially the experience of being attuned in certain ways rather than others. If, for Böhme (1993), atmospheres are about the perceived presence of something and their reality in space, we might think of Jace’s experience of growing up as a way of feeling the atmospheric force of Facebook. Stopping what he was doing in order to pose for his dad’s Facebook photo also became a way of being attuned to the meaning of family and a certain way of staging what a happy family life looks like.

Jace’s story is not unique. Most of us have felt the presence of Facebook in one way or another. There are the ways in which we dance and have fun in front of the camera in case it gets posted on Facebook as evidence of a good time, the strategic status updating to boost the sense of personal success, or the way in which we make sure others know that we voted. If we include Instagram, the Facebook-owned image-sharing app, many more examples come to mind. The felt presence of Facebook as a ‘family of apps’, consisting of Messenger, Instagram, WhatsApp and Facebook, can be seen in the ways that restaurants make dishes appear ‘Instagram-worthy’ or the ways in families coordinate their daily routines and communicate in smaller groups using WhatsApp or Messenger. Bille et al. (2015) describe how architects and designers work to stage atmospheres, by intentionally shaping spaces for certain emotional responses. While the authors mainly have physical buildings in mind, Facebook, too, should be seen as a designed space that seeks to affect people’s moods and guide their behaviour for utilitarian and commercial purposes.

Beyond the pre-individual scales of measure, or intensities, that are often taken to be at the heart of how affect is theorized (Clough, 2008), the notion of feeling Facebook is very much part of the articulable realm. When people feel the presence of Facebook in their lives, it is not necessarily beyond discourse and conscious representation, as certain strands of affect theory would have it (Massumi, 1995). While the force of Facebook may be difficult to articulate, in terms of pointing to what exactly it is about Facebook that spurs a specific sensation or emotion, there is no denying the fact that Facebook means a lot to individuals, organizations and institutions alike. The presence of Facebook is felt everywhere, whether it is in the very real sense of threatening the livelihood and condition of an entire institution, such as journalism and the news industry, or more subtly as in the ways in which the health sector has to grapple with Facebook as an alternative information-seeking forum for patients. From the perspective of other businesses and organizations, Facebook means affected revenue streams, changing workflows, new job titles, opportunities for organizing protests, breaking and redefining news, a new political platform and regulatory challenges.

Far from being insignificant, then, Facebook matters. It matters because Facebook orients people. Following cultural theorist Sara Ahmed, we might say that Facebook’s power has to do with such orientations. ‘Orientations matter,’ Ahmed writes, because they ‘shape how the world coheres’ (Ahmed, 2010: 235). While Ahmed specifically speaks about being oriented in the world from the perspective of ‘queer phenomenology’ and the ways in which the world coheres around certain bodies rather than others, we might think about Facebook in similar ways. We are oriented towards Facebook, whether we like it or not, and Facebook is oriented towards us. Take Jace, from the WIRED feature: he might not use Facebook personally, but it still orients his family’s life and the way in which family life is performed. Moreover, my well-meaning colleague might think Facebook has lost its cool, but that does not take away the fact that to many people and organizations, coolness is not even an issue. Talk to the editor-in-chief of a major newspaper that has lost its advertising money to Facebook, and they will not care whether Facebook shows a slight decline in active monthly users among the younger generations. All they will probably care about is their newspaper, the journalists and what it means for the future of journalism. Or talk to a Rohingya refugee whose life has been threatened by the atrocities in Myanmar following the spread of propaganda on Facebook by Buddhist ultranationalists. I am sure their Facebook story will provide an answer to why Facebook matters.

An orientation approach asks us to attend to the ways in which the object of analysis affects ‘what is proximate’ and ‘what can be reached’ (Ahmed, 2006: 3). What matters in how ‘we come to find our way in the world’ (Ahmed, 2006: 1), however, is not always a given. As Ahmed writes, ‘depending on which way we turn’, the world may take on new shapes and meanings. The question is what makes us turn one way or the other in the first place? In this book, I suggest that Facebook constitutes one particularly powerful orientation device, in that it shapes ‘“who” or “what” we direct our energy and attention toward’ (Ahmed, 2006: 3). This holds true whether we think of Facebook’s algorithms and platform design directing people’s attention, its de facto role as a dominant news source, or its persistent position as a centre of attention in policy circles, electoral politics and surveillance capitalism. True, even the slightest sound, strange smell, or unexpected touch can make us turn, but nothing seems quite as disorienting and commanding of our attention in the algorithmic media environment as Facebook. When things orient, they take up space, they make an impression, render other things more or less probable, provide a path for further direction, suggest what is important, put in place. As we will see throughout this book, this is exactly what Facebook does. Importantly, as a global orientation device of massive scale, Facebook does not merely take up space. It also shapes it in fundamental ways.