Abstract
Media ideologies, remediation, and idioms of practice are related terms that define how people, both individuals and communities, use digital writing. By explaining how people use digital writing, readers can better understand what digital writing is itself. In this article we define the terms Media ideologies, remediation, and idioms of practice in relation to each other. There are examples provided from different digital writing communities to illustrate these definitions and make them more explicitly define digital writing as a whole.
Key Terms
Media Ideologies
Definition
Ilana Gershon defines media ideologies as, "a set of beliefs about communicative technologies with which users and designers explain perceived media structure and meaning" (Gershon 3). At first glance this definition can be hard to decipher, but once it is understood is actually a simple concept. These are a set of beliefs that each person creates on their own, which shape the way in which they think about and use technology and media. They are shaped by the individual's use of media and interaction with others through them. When individuals' media ideologies differ, those are the times in which tensions arise and can cause confusion and misunderstanding between the individuals and the community. The idea of public vs. private affects the individuals' media ideologies; it directly affects the personal choice of whether or not to include any given information. For further reading, the page Self Identity Creation explores how media ideologies can affect identity formation and the view of the self.
Examples
When looking for examples of media ideologies in digital writing, one of the best places to look are the discussion pages of wikis. These are the places where individuals within communities express their views on exactly what should and shouldn't be included within the site and on specific pages. One specific example is this quote by an anonymous author on the Sarah Palin discussion page of Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_palin). They address the issue of the introduction of the article saying,
"This article is the parent to all things Wiki about Sarah Palin. The intro should briefly summarize the criticisms and controversies in this parent article and all daughter articles, including Public Image, etc. Anything less is a disservice to this article and to Wikipedia. She is a highly polarizing figure and it should be noted up front"
(1). This author is showing his or her distinctive ideas about what exactly should be included within the introduction, and further, is showing the audience his media ideologies relating to Wikipedia. When he says that "anything less would be a disservice to this article and Wikipedia" he is showing that he believes that the definitions on these wiki pages should give summaries not only of criticisms, but of controversies, in order to accurately present the topic in question. Another example of someone showing their media ideologies about Wikidpedia is in the talk section of an article on Aquatic Locomotion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquatic_locomotion). They are arguing what the focus of the article should be, and one person says, "Because science takes precedence over mere diversions like sports and recreation, the plain fact of the matter is that having “Aquatic Locomotion” focus only on humans is like redirecting mammal to human and creating a new page for "non-human mammals". It's utter nonsense that only makes sense from the most biased, anthropocentric POV" (5). This person explicitly states that this Wikipedia article should "take precedence" over other things. He goes on to describe how he believes anything less than a scientific viewpoint on this wiki page would be a "biased, anthropocentric POV." This person has clearly stated his personal media ideologies about what Wikipedia should be used for, which he believes is an unbiased scientific viewpoint. These examples from wikipedia show people who openly express their ideologies about how a certain type of media (in this case, Wikipedia) should and should not be used.
Remediation
Definition
Ilana Gershon defines remediation as, "the ways that people interlink media, suggesting that people define every technology in terms of the other communicative technologies available to them" (5). This idea means that the way people use new technology is affected by the technologies they are already familiar with. People's media ideologies of new media need to be analyzed alongside of media ideologies surrounding older media. Through comparisons, people transform their understandings of both the new and the old media. Immediacy and hypermediation are two ends of the spectrum of remediation. Immediacy is when a media represents reality and face-to-face conversation, whereas hypermediation calls attention to the media of communication itself (99-100). Amy uses Facebook to expand on the idea of remediation on her page, here.
Examples
An example of remediation regarding digital writing can be seen in people's opinions and expectations surrounding the use of Facebook and older modes of communication such as the telephone. When two people (one on Facebook and the other not) begin flirting, complications may arise. The Facebook user might think it is strange that the non-Facebook user is calling and texting so much. Today, the common way to begin flirting is to add someone on Facebook and casually begin a conversation over Facebook Chat or wall posts. Calling and texting implies a deep interest in the relationship. The person unfamiliar with Facebook would not know this, and would thus be sending off unintended social signals. In contrast, the Facebook user expects certain practices to mean certain things when it comes to the use of a cell phone because of the exposure to Facebook practices. In this way Facebook has transformed the meaning of calling and texting because of its existence as a means of communication (Gershon 109-110).
Likewise, the layout of the New York Times newspaper has affected the visual appearance of the New York Times website. The website has the title of the newspaper at the top of the page, written in the same font as the printed version. It also has a "cover story" at the top of the page that has a larger related image. Additionally, it has "sections" like a newspaper. For example, both the printed New York Times and the website version have a Business section, Art section, World section, Opinion section, etc. The website also has a list down the side of it naming other articles that have been recently updated, much like the newspaper has a list of other articles within the newspaper down the side of the front page. The website designers made the website look like this due to remediation. Users are accustomed to the newspaper format of the Times, and enjoy seeing the familiar format on the website. The makers of the website wanted to maintain the connection between the printed and digital versions of the news.
Idioms of Practice
Definition
Ilana Gershon defines idioms of practice as the way "people figure out together how to use different media and often agree on the appropriate social uses of technology by asking advice and sharing stories with each other" (6). People create idioms of practice by interacting with others and implicitly or explicitly defining the norms of using media. Different groups will naturally create different idioms of practice, as Gershon describes, "Groups of friends, classes, and workers in an office will develop together their own ways of using media to communicate with each other" (39). In this way, idioms of practice can help to define certain groups. Sometimes people do not realize that they have formed idioms of practice until they encounter someone who has different practices. This encounter often leads to a judgement of use of media as "right" or "wrong," allowing for members of a group to pass ethical judgement on a user of the media in question. Gershon says that these types of encounters can also bring about many misunderstandings and tensions because people are miscommunicating (often without realizing it).
Examples
Idioms of practice can be identified when people with differing idioms of practices interact. For example, people probably have different idioms of practice for texting their parents versus texting their best friends, because these two groups (usually) use technology differently. Parents might not understand inside jokes or abbreviations, and so it is an understood rule (i.e., idiom of practice) that you do not text parents with these inside jokes or abbreviations. Gershon describes common idioms of practice for social networks like Facebook. She describes how it is commonly acknowledged that sending an inbox message to someone you do not personally know is not socially acceptable. It is also not acceptable to create a fake profile in order to "stalk" other people that you are not friends with or to simply have a name listed as "in a relationship" with you on your profile. At the very least, it is not acceptable to tell people you have done this (Gershon 150). This specific example of remediation is found on Jessica's Page, and reads, "In the two years prior to the creation of Writerscafe.org, users became familiar with idioms of practice on Facebook. These idioms included “do not send private messages to strangers” and “do not create fake profiles." From this quote we can see how the older genre of Facebook and its use affected the newer social networking site, Writerscafe.org. Groups define these idioms of practice by observing and interacting with one another. For example, on Twitter it is acceptable to retweet strangers' tweets and to follow people you do not personally know, such as celebrities. New users learn this by reading their friend's retweets and browsing through the list of people that their friends follow. Another example is a rule we've all heard- the "three day rule" after you get a girl's phone number. This rule says not to call her or text her within three days of getting her number so that you do not seem overly eager and desperate. This is an idiom of practice because it is a collectively held idea surrounding American dating practices. Though no group formally sat down and established the rule "Thou shalt not text a girl within three days upon receipt of her phone number," everyone follows this practice because their friends and family members have advised them about it directly, or indirectly through example.
Conclusion
Media ideologies, remediation, and idioms of practice are not easy terms to separate and define, because each word helps to define another. As we mentioned above, media ideologies are the "set of beliefs" that each individual user has when using media. These media ideologies are sometimes turned into idioms of practice when a community implicitly or explicitly defines and adheres to certain rules of using media. Idioms of practice and media ideologies are directly affected by remediation, because people will form their ideologies and practices of new media based on other familiar technology. In order to understand why people use media in the ways that they do, one must understand how media ideologies and idioms of practice are formed, as well as how remediation affects the formation of these ideas and practices. All three of these terms, however, are essential to defining digital writing as a whole, and help to form an understanding of how this writing genre is used rhetorically.
References
Gershon, Ilana. The Breakup 2.0: Disconnecting over New Media. Cornell UP, 2010. Print.
Aquatic Locomotion. Wikipedia. accessed 2011, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquatic_locomotion.
Sarah Palin. Wikipedia. accessed 2011, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_palin.