The cyberspace myth and political communication, within the limits of netocracy

Technological augmentation in the field of communication is a new way of controlling and manipulating the interface between current political communications and information. This is because, within the new paradigms of power, political communication is under the influence of netocracy, a new and myt...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Schussler, Aura-Elena (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Aufsatz
Sprache:Englisch
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Lade...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Veröffentlicht: CEEOL [2017]
In: Journal for the study of religions and ideologies
Jahr: 2017, Band: 16, Heft: 48, Seiten: 65-78
normierte Schlagwort(-folgen):B Cyber space / Communication / Globalization / Control / Politics
RelBib Classification:AA Religionswissenschaft
AD Religionssoziologie; Religionspolitik
ZC Politik
weitere Schlagwörter:B Myth
B netocracy
B Rhizome
B political actors
B superpanopticism
B Cyber space
B Political Communication
B netocrats
Online Zugang: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Technological augmentation in the field of communication is a new way of controlling and manipulating the interface between current political communications and information. This is because, within the new paradigms of power, political communication is under the influence of netocracy, a new and mythical form of cybertechnological superpanopticism. The general objective of this paper is to analyze the phenomenon of cybertechnological globalization where, according to Alexander Bard and Jan Söderqvist, this new form of political and communicative superpanopticism is the result of netocracy. This is related not just to the undermining of capitalism, but also to the myth of internet transparency as the site for communicational freedom. In theoretical terms, this paper seeks to deconstruct this hypothesis based on Slavoj Žižek's position on netocracy. He claims this phenomenon is little more than a new and perverse form of capitalism which engages new methods of manipulating political communication. The methodology used in this paper draws on Bard and Söderqvist's arguments, Žižek's critique and Gilles Deleuze's deconstruction.
ISSN:1583-0039
Enthält:Enthalten in: Journal for the study of religions and ideologies