{"title":"振兴东西方网络传播:时间数字化变化的微中宏联系","authors":"M. Faust","doi":"10.47298/cala2019.2-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper explains in a de-westernized sense (Gunaratne, 2010) how internet-mediated communication changes the way we deal with and plan time both individually and culturally in Germany and China. Therefore, it blends Western and Eastern culture and media theories. The paper focuses on two distinct phenomena: temporal change due to social media, and Online journalism, as the core of Internet-mediated communication (for Germany 39% communication, media use 24% Projektgruppe ARD/ZDF-Multimedia, 2016; for China 90.7% instant messaging, 82% Internet news China Internet Network Information Center, 2017), with other temporal change via smart devices touched upon (Ash, 2018). General research on time in post modern societies, recently more focused on media’s temporal change phenomena (e.g. Barker, 2012; Barker, 2018; Castells, 2010; Eriksen, 2001; Hartmann, 2016; Hassan, 2003; Innis, 2004; Neverla, 2010a, 2010b; Nowotny, 1995; Rantanen, 2005; Wajcman, 2010; Wajcman and Dodd) has not yet linked the different societal and cultural levels of temporal change. Thus, we suggest the following to fill this research gap: For a micro perspective the notions of network theories (e.g. Granovetter, 1973; Schönhuth, 2013), media synchronicity (Dennis, Fuller, and Valacich, 2008) and the idea of permanent connectivity (Sonnentag, Reinecke, Mata, and Vorderer, 2018; van Dijck, 2013; Vorderer, Krömer, and Schneider, 2016) are linked. On a meso level, institutional change in Online journalism with a focus on acceleration is modeled (Ananny, 2016; Bødker and Sonnevend, 2017; Dimmick, Feaster, and Hoplamazian, 2011; Krüger, 2014; Neuberger, 2010). On a macro level, mediatization theory (Couldry and Hepp, 2017; Krotz, 2001, 2012) and recent acceleration theory (Rosa, 2005, 2012, 2017) is discussed. The levels are systematically linked suggesting a micro-meso-macro-link (Quandt, 2010) to then ask if and how many of the dimensions of the construct temporal understanding (Faust, 2016) can be changed through Internet-mediated communication. Temporal understanding consists of nine dimensions: General past, general future, instrumental experience (monochronicity), fatalism, interacting experience (polychronicity), pace of life, future as planned expectation and result of proximal goals as well as future as trust based interacting expectation and result of present positive behavior. Temporal understanding integrates the anthropological construct of polychronicity (Bluedorn, Kalliath, Strube, and Martin, 1999; Hall, 1984; Lindquist and Kaufman-Scarborough, 2007), pace of life (Levine, 1998) and temporal horizon (Klapproth, 2011) into a broader framework which goes beyond Western biased constructs through the theory driven incorporation of Confucian notions (Chinese Culture Connection, 1987). Finally, meta trends are laid out.","PeriodicalId":443508,"journal":{"name":"The GLOCAL in Asia 2019","volume":"77 5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Revitalizing Eastern and Western Online Communication: A Micro-Meso-Macro Link of Temporal Digital Change\",\"authors\":\"M. Faust\",\"doi\":\"10.47298/cala2019.2-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper explains in a de-westernized sense (Gunaratne, 2010) how internet-mediated communication changes the way we deal with and plan time both individually and culturally in Germany and China. Therefore, it blends Western and Eastern culture and media theories. The paper focuses on two distinct phenomena: temporal change due to social media, and Online journalism, as the core of Internet-mediated communication (for Germany 39% communication, media use 24% Projektgruppe ARD/ZDF-Multimedia, 2016; for China 90.7% instant messaging, 82% Internet news China Internet Network Information Center, 2017), with other temporal change via smart devices touched upon (Ash, 2018). General research on time in post modern societies, recently more focused on media’s temporal change phenomena (e.g. Barker, 2012; Barker, 2018; Castells, 2010; Eriksen, 2001; Hartmann, 2016; Hassan, 2003; Innis, 2004; Neverla, 2010a, 2010b; Nowotny, 1995; Rantanen, 2005; Wajcman, 2010; Wajcman and Dodd) has not yet linked the different societal and cultural levels of temporal change. Thus, we suggest the following to fill this research gap: For a micro perspective the notions of network theories (e.g. Granovetter, 1973; Schönhuth, 2013), media synchronicity (Dennis, Fuller, and Valacich, 2008) and the idea of permanent connectivity (Sonnentag, Reinecke, Mata, and Vorderer, 2018; van Dijck, 2013; Vorderer, Krömer, and Schneider, 2016) are linked. On a meso level, institutional change in Online journalism with a focus on acceleration is modeled (Ananny, 2016; Bødker and Sonnevend, 2017; Dimmick, Feaster, and Hoplamazian, 2011; Krüger, 2014; Neuberger, 2010). On a macro level, mediatization theory (Couldry and Hepp, 2017; Krotz, 2001, 2012) and recent acceleration theory (Rosa, 2005, 2012, 2017) is discussed. The levels are systematically linked suggesting a micro-meso-macro-link (Quandt, 2010) to then ask if and how many of the dimensions of the construct temporal understanding (Faust, 2016) can be changed through Internet-mediated communication. Temporal understanding consists of nine dimensions: General past, general future, instrumental experience (monochronicity), fatalism, interacting experience (polychronicity), pace of life, future as planned expectation and result of proximal goals as well as future as trust based interacting expectation and result of present positive behavior. Temporal understanding integrates the anthropological construct of polychronicity (Bluedorn, Kalliath, Strube, and Martin, 1999; Hall, 1984; Lindquist and Kaufman-Scarborough, 2007), pace of life (Levine, 1998) and temporal horizon (Klapproth, 2011) into a broader framework which goes beyond Western biased constructs through the theory driven incorporation of Confucian notions (Chinese Culture Connection, 1987). Finally, meta trends are laid out.\",\"PeriodicalId\":443508,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The GLOCAL in Asia 2019\",\"volume\":\"77 5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The GLOCAL in Asia 2019\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47298/cala2019.2-2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The GLOCAL in Asia 2019","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47298/cala2019.2-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文从去西方化的角度(Gunaratne, 2010)解释了互联网媒介传播如何改变了我们在德国和中国处理和计划时间的方式,无论是个人还是文化。因此,它融合了东西方文化和媒介理论。本文关注两种截然不同的现象:社交媒体造成的时间变化,以及作为互联网媒介传播核心的在线新闻(对于德国39%的传播,媒体使用24% project jektgruppe ARD/ZDF-Multimedia, 2016;中国90.7%为即时通讯,82%为互联网新闻,中国互联网络信息中心,2017),其他时间变化涉及智能设备(Ash, 2018)。关于后现代社会时间的一般研究,最近更多地关注媒体的时间变化现象(如Barker, 2012;巴克,2018;中文版2010;埃里克森,2001;哈特曼,2016;哈桑,2003;英尼斯,2004;梦幻庄园,2010a, 2010b;(, 1995;Rantanen, 2005;Wajcman, 2010;Wajcman和Dodd)还没有将不同的社会和文化水平的时间变化联系起来。因此,我们提出以下建议来填补这一研究空白:从微观角度来看,网络理论的概念(如Granovetter, 1973;Schönhuth, 2013),媒体同时性(Dennis, Fuller, and Valacich, 2008)和永久连接的概念(Sonnentag, Reinecke, Mata, and Vorderer, 2018;范·迪克,2013;Vorderer, Krömer, and Schneider, 2016)相互关联。在中观层面上,以加速为重点的在线新闻制度变革进行了建模(Ananny, 2016;Bødker and Sonnevend, 2017;Dimmick, Feaster, and Hoplamazian, 2011;克鲁格,2014;Neuberger, 2010)。在宏观层面上,中介化理论(Couldry and Hepp, 2017;Krotz, 2001, 2012)和最近的加速理论(Rosa, 2005, 2012, 2017)进行了讨论。这些层次是系统地联系在一起的,这表明了一种微观-中观-宏观的联系(Quandt, 2010),然后询问构建时间理解的维度(Faust, 2016)是否以及有多少可以通过互联网媒介的交流来改变。时间理解包括9个维度:一般过去、一般未来、工具体验(单时性)、宿命论、互动体验(多时性)、生活节奏、计划中的未来预期和近期目标的结果、基于信任的未来预期和当前积极行为的结果。时间理解整合了多时性的人类学结构(Bluedorn, Kalliath, Strube, and Martin, 1999;大厅,1984;Lindquist和Kaufman-Scarborough, 2007),生活节奏(Levine, 1998)和时间视界(klapath, 2011)通过理论驱动的儒家观念的结合,将其纳入一个更广泛的框架,超越了西方的偏见结构(中国文化联系,1987)。最后,列出元趋势。
Revitalizing Eastern and Western Online Communication: A Micro-Meso-Macro Link of Temporal Digital Change
This paper explains in a de-westernized sense (Gunaratne, 2010) how internet-mediated communication changes the way we deal with and plan time both individually and culturally in Germany and China. Therefore, it blends Western and Eastern culture and media theories. The paper focuses on two distinct phenomena: temporal change due to social media, and Online journalism, as the core of Internet-mediated communication (for Germany 39% communication, media use 24% Projektgruppe ARD/ZDF-Multimedia, 2016; for China 90.7% instant messaging, 82% Internet news China Internet Network Information Center, 2017), with other temporal change via smart devices touched upon (Ash, 2018). General research on time in post modern societies, recently more focused on media’s temporal change phenomena (e.g. Barker, 2012; Barker, 2018; Castells, 2010; Eriksen, 2001; Hartmann, 2016; Hassan, 2003; Innis, 2004; Neverla, 2010a, 2010b; Nowotny, 1995; Rantanen, 2005; Wajcman, 2010; Wajcman and Dodd) has not yet linked the different societal and cultural levels of temporal change. Thus, we suggest the following to fill this research gap: For a micro perspective the notions of network theories (e.g. Granovetter, 1973; Schönhuth, 2013), media synchronicity (Dennis, Fuller, and Valacich, 2008) and the idea of permanent connectivity (Sonnentag, Reinecke, Mata, and Vorderer, 2018; van Dijck, 2013; Vorderer, Krömer, and Schneider, 2016) are linked. On a meso level, institutional change in Online journalism with a focus on acceleration is modeled (Ananny, 2016; Bødker and Sonnevend, 2017; Dimmick, Feaster, and Hoplamazian, 2011; Krüger, 2014; Neuberger, 2010). On a macro level, mediatization theory (Couldry and Hepp, 2017; Krotz, 2001, 2012) and recent acceleration theory (Rosa, 2005, 2012, 2017) is discussed. The levels are systematically linked suggesting a micro-meso-macro-link (Quandt, 2010) to then ask if and how many of the dimensions of the construct temporal understanding (Faust, 2016) can be changed through Internet-mediated communication. Temporal understanding consists of nine dimensions: General past, general future, instrumental experience (monochronicity), fatalism, interacting experience (polychronicity), pace of life, future as planned expectation and result of proximal goals as well as future as trust based interacting expectation and result of present positive behavior. Temporal understanding integrates the anthropological construct of polychronicity (Bluedorn, Kalliath, Strube, and Martin, 1999; Hall, 1984; Lindquist and Kaufman-Scarborough, 2007), pace of life (Levine, 1998) and temporal horizon (Klapproth, 2011) into a broader framework which goes beyond Western biased constructs through the theory driven incorporation of Confucian notions (Chinese Culture Connection, 1987). Finally, meta trends are laid out.