Related to #7! Enjoyed reading the chapter, this is more of a comment than a question!
As mentioned by ShuyanHuang, there are many studies that indicate engagement in an activity as closely related to the tendency to diffuse information about the activity (Cabrera et. al 2007, Abhijit 2013). Yet, these streams may, as you point out, be easily caught in their own feedback loop - restricting the release of affective intensity and also constricting the bounds of information travel. However, one's level of engagement in an activity is indicative of one's self-efficacy and motivation regarding the subject matter (Linnenbrink, 2007) and these traits are often key in communicating effectively and "affectively" about the subject. It might be interesting then, to incorporate the nature and structures of engagement within the analysis of the network - the aspects of these which might enable affective intensity and trans-network pathways.
In the present day, it is not unreasonable to posit that the potential power of a single communicative artifact is diminished due to the transitory nature of modern information consumption. This is the bane of many interventionist endeavors that seek to make lasting change by deploying traditional communicative methods (Spivak 1999 and others). A popular book today could be quickly forgotten tomorrow, a film lauded as "sensational and inspiring" is quickly replaced by whatever the next blockbuster is, a pamphlet that you thought was interesting is buried in your bag under many other paper products. Whether or not this is due to systemic change in the information market, or simply a result of attention fragmentation and market saturation (Fortunato et. al, 2018) is a separate examination. In any case, as it is in your work, we need to turn to the multi-modal space of new media, where different forms of engagement can occur.
It will definitely be useful to delineate and examine features of the public space (Deleuze & Guattari's smooth/striated model, and your concept of the online supersurface) and of network aesthetics - be it media forms or social structures (Jagoda et.al 2015, Jagoda 2016) - that could mediate the engagement nature of existing participants and present unique opportunities for co-opting new ones.
Related to #7! Enjoyed reading the chapter, this is more of a comment than a question!
As mentioned by ShuyanHuang, there are many studies that indicate engagement in an activity as closely related to the tendency to diffuse information about the activity (Cabrera et. al 2007, Abhijit 2013). Yet, these streams may, as you point out, be easily caught in their own feedback loop - restricting the release of affective intensity and also constricting the bounds of information travel. However, one's level of engagement in an activity is indicative of one's self-efficacy and motivation regarding the subject matter (Linnenbrink, 2007) and these traits are often key in communicating effectively and "affectively" about the subject. It might be interesting then, to incorporate the nature and structures of engagement within the analysis of the network - the aspects of these which might enable affective intensity and trans-network pathways.
In the present day, it is not unreasonable to posit that the potential power of a single communicative artifact is diminished due to the transitory nature of modern information consumption. This is the bane of many interventionist endeavors that seek to make lasting change by deploying traditional communicative methods (Spivak 1999 and others). A popular book today could be quickly forgotten tomorrow, a film lauded as "sensational and inspiring" is quickly replaced by whatever the next blockbuster is, a pamphlet that you thought was interesting is buried in your bag under many other paper products. Whether or not this is due to systemic change in the information market, or simply a result of attention fragmentation and market saturation (Fortunato et. al, 2018) is a separate examination. In any case, as it is in your work, we need to turn to the multi-modal space of new media, where different forms of engagement can occur.
It will definitely be useful to delineate and examine features of the public space (Deleuze & Guattari's smooth/striated model, and your concept of the online supersurface) and of network aesthetics - be it media forms or social structures (Jagoda et.al 2015, Jagoda 2016) - that could mediate the engagement nature of existing participants and present unique opportunities for co-opting new ones.
Thank you for presenting!