An exploratory study of advancing interdisciplinary research trends in digital new media
Abstract
Aim: The paper’s overarching goal is to provide a theoretical framework for analyzing modern platform-based media ecosystems, and it does so by discussing three theoretical stances that offer promising new avenues of inquiry within the larger framework of communication studies. The paper zeroes in on how the original two ends of the communication process, the communicators and the receivers, change as a result of technology-centred contributions to social impact.
Method: The two primary aspects of the methodology are discussed in this paper, and they are illustrated with examples using a logical research path and path diagram. An investigation into potential interdisciplinary research developments in digital new media will use existing literature reviews and theoretical perspectives on their application across disciplines as its primary framework.
Findings: People’s knowledge of and care about how they use media can be strengthened by interdisciplinary research in new media, which examines the fundamental shift in medium and the communication capabilities derived from new media. This helps advance the field of digital new media research, which fosters investigation into novel forms of communication and the study of its interdisciplinary practices, and further enriches and develops the theory of communication in the twenty-first century.
Implications/Novel Contribution: By allowing anyone to contribute, UGC gives people who use new media a chance to act as content creators, agents, and practitioners all at once. As a result of this trend, substantial social transformations will be accelerated and amplified. As a result, new media cannot be viewed as merely a new-style communication instrument but as a fusion of several different disciplinary dimensions. The data was collected to bolster foreseeable interdisciplinary social sciences and humanities progress.
References
Baidu, B. (2019). Big v. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/38eXgGD
Basoglu, B. (2017). You Tube or writing tube: A technology-mediated learning tool for TESOL. International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, 3(3), 98-105. doi:https://doi.org/10.20469/ijhss.3.20001-3
Buckingham, D. (2007). Digital media literacies: Rethinking media education in the age of the internet. Research in Comparative and International Education, 2(1), 43-55. doi:https://doi.org/10.2304/rcie.2007.2.1.43
Couldry, N. (2002). The place of media power: Pilgrims and witnesses of the media age. London, UK: Routledge.Couldry, N. (2003). Media and symbolic power: Extending the range of bourdieu’s field theory. Theory and Society, 32(5), 653-677. doi:https://doi.org/10.1023/b:ryso.0000004915.37826.5d
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554-571. doi:https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554
De Kerckhove, D. (1991). Communication arts for a new spatial sensibility. Leonardo, 24(2), 131-135. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/1575281
De Reuver, M., Sørensen, C., & Basole, R. C. (2018). The digital platform: A research agenda. Journal of Information Technology, 33(2), 124-135. doi:https://doi.org/10.1057/s41265-016-0033-3
Dixon, V. K. (2009). Understanding the implications of a global village. Inquiries Journal, 1(11), 45-60.
Habermas, J. (1991). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. California, CA: MIT press.
Hjorth, L., & Hinton, S. (2019). Understanding social media. New York, NY: Sage Publications Limited.
Kim, J. (2012). The institutionalization of you tube: From user-generated content to professionally generated content. Media, Culture & Society, 34(1), 53-67. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443711427199
Knoblauch, M. (2014). Millennials trust user-generated content 50 more than other media. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2tti0M1
Lehr, W., Clark, D., Bauer, S., Berger, A., & Richter, P. (2019). Whither the public internet? Journal of Information Policy, 9, 1-42. doi:https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.9.2019.0001
Litschka, M. (2019). The political economy of media capabilities: The capability approach in media policy. Journal of Information Policy, 9, 63-94. doi:https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.9.2019.0063
Livingstone, S., & Helsper, E. (2007). Gradations in digital inclusion: Children, young people and the digital divide. New Media & Society, 9(4), 671-696. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807080335
Mansell, R., Steinmueller, W. E., et al. (2000). Mobilizing the information society: Strategies for growth and opportunity. London, UK: Oxford University Press.
Norris, P., et al. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the internet worldwide. Cambridge , MA: Cambridge University Press.
Polat, S. O. O., F., & Uluturk, A. S. (2018). Hate speech in Turkish media: The example of Charlie Hebdo attack’s. Journal of Advanced Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 3(2), 68-75. doi:https://doi.org/10.26500/jarssh-03-2018-0204
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Thomas, T., & Mefalopulos, P. (2009). Participatory communication: A practical guide. New York, NY: The World Bank.
Tsatsou, P. (2011). Digital divides revisited: What is new about divides and their research? Media, Culture & Society, 33(2), 317-331.
oi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443710393865
Ugur, N. G., & Barutcu, M. T. (2018). Investigating social media activities: A study on celebrity posts. Journal of Advances in Humanities and Social Sciences, 4(2), 84-92. doi:https://doi.org/10.20474/jahss-4.2.3
White, S. A. (2003). Participatory video: Images that transform and empower. London, UK: Sage.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
.png)
