Page 153 - Critical Political Economy of the Media

132 Critical investigations in political economy

digital communications can and should be realised through free-market capitalism.
A minority tradition, inspired by communitarian values, criticises market funda-
mentalism and envisions the expansion of non-commercial social production and
exchange. For Benkler (2006: 10–11) ‘the networked public sphere enables many
more individuals to communicate their observations and their viewpoints to
many others, and to do so in a way that cannot be controlled by media owners
and is not as easily corruptible by money as were the mass media’.
Fuchs (2008) identifies a shift in the primary focus of accumulation strategies
from information to communication and co-operation. Where the 1990s is asso-
ciated with ‘static page’ content and information provision, the post-2002 phase is
associated with the growth and investment in social networking platforms, wikis, and
folksonomies that facilitate creativity, co-creation and sharing between users. How-
ever, like many critical scholars, Fuchs is sceptical of the adoption of terms such as
Web 2.0. The latter is traced to the promotional work of marketers, notably Tim
O’Reilly, and regarded by Fuchs (2012) and others as a ‘marketing strategy for
2
boosting investment’. Optimistic accounts of friction-free capitalism, stilled by the
dotcom collapse, resurfaced amidst new claims for Web 2.0 as initiating a ‘new
mode of production’ (Tapscott and Williams 2006: ix), a more innovative, creative,
participatory and efficient form of capitalism (see Freedman 2012). This repudiates
an opposing critical account of ‘monopoly capitalism’ as a system structured around
sustaining the most dominant interests operating in the marketplace. Confronted
with such contrasting accounts, navigating through various techno-optimist
and techno-pessimist strains can be confusing as well as dispiriting. Yet there are
critical approaches that offer ways to engage with the complexity and contradictory
dynamics of networked communications. Murdock (2003: 29) identifies the struggle
over ‘three cultural economics and their associated modalities of exchange’:

1 commercial transactions
2 ‘free’ distribution of public cultural goods
3 gift relations (‘based on the reciprocal exchange and pooling of services and
information’).

The three systems and practices of exchange coexist and compete. This dynamic
account highlights contestation, but in doing so Murdock warns against repeating
the errors of an earlier phase of cultural analysis, which overstated and roman-
ticised possibilities for dissent. The architecture of Internet communications does
enable the kinds of non-commodified, non-proprietary ‘gift’ exchanges celebrated
by Benkler and others, as enthusiasts share knowledge, insights and creative
expression with one another, but the realisation of such ‘non-market’ values is
ultimately constrained by the dominant political-economic system in which they
exist. This accords with a core Marxian critique: a recognition of the dynamism,
innovation and achievements of capitalism, yet combined with a recognition that
capitalism is systematically unable to realise the full potential of its achievements
for the benefit of the many.