pedimillenial-blog

[pedimillenial-blog]

Zuma Supporters: A fandom in their own right

Fandom is gendered. Well, most of the time. There is always a specific audience in mind when a media text is created. There also always different types of stereotypes that are attached to certain media texts when it comes to who is thought to enjoy them. For example, with soccer the stereotype is that it is a sport that only men watch and that women should not be watching soccer. Another example of how fandom can be gendered can be seen with ‘Bronies’, adult men who enjoy watching My Little Pony. Those who subvert the traditional norms of fandom are often met with hostility. “When Bronies admit to liking My Little Pony they are similarly reviled. These criticisms do not just come from outside of the My Little Pony fandom, however. Reactions to Bronies from other MLP fans can be just as vitriolic, and just as gendered” (Jones 2015: 121). Bronies are an example of how gendered fandom can be and how when certain stereotypes are challenged, those doing the challenging are subjected to a host of criticism.

“But these respectable social types could also be defined as ‘fans’ in that they display interest, affection and attachment, especially for figures in, or aspects of, their chosen field” (Jenson 1992: 9). Normally, fandom is associated with pop culture. Celebrities are often at the centre of fandom, where fans are dedicated to following them and keeping up with their lives. Some fans go so far as to try to emulate celebrities in how they look and act. However, if fandoms can be described as people who take their genuine like for something or someone and extend it beyond watching that person on television/ consuming the media that person makes, then can we use the term to describe Zuma supporters?

Former South African president Jacob Zuma was- and still remains- a controversial figure in South African politics. His followers however, are staunch and unwavering in their support for the former president, no matter the representations of him in the media. This type of fandom is somewhat different from the traditional notion of fandom which features the targeted audience being obsessed with a new phenomenon in pop culture. This is because instead of it being young girls pledging their allegiance to a boy band, this ‘fandom’ involves a more toned down version of support while still meeting the requirements of being a fandom in that the fans take their like for something/someone and then band together to show their support in different ways. Those who are fans of the former president can often be seen conducting rallies in support of him and arguing against those who are anti-Zuma. They have a role to play in protecting the former president from attacks from all sectors of society- the ANC, the media and even civil society. Anti-Zuma activists can too, to a certain extent be described as a fandom because of their devotion to being anti-Zuma.

The attitude the pro-Zuma fandom has towards anti-Zuma protestors:

An example of a time when Zuma supporters extended their devotion to him was when the former president was due to appear in court earlier this year on corruption charges. With their ANC colours and posters reading “#HandsOffZuma”, the supporters took to the courthouse to stand in support of their president. Ahead of former president Zuma’s court appearance supporters held a night vigil “to pray an show support for the former president” (Ndenze 2018). Supporters did this despite the cold weather. They were determined to show their support. This is an example of fans who are dedicated.

As afore mentioned, the Zuma ‘fandom’ is different from most. The fans are not necessarily homogenous but compromise of people of different demographics. There are people different ages, men and women, ordinary citizens and politicians who all are committed to supporting former president Jacob Zuma. The #HandsOffZuma campaign involved different people. The BLF (Black First Land First) movement, along with the ANC Women's League were both involved in the campaign. This illustrates the above point that the Zuma fandom is not homogeneous and thus subverts the traditional notion of fandom being only specific to one demographic.

Say what you will about controversial figure former president Jacob Zuma, but his fan base is loyal. To stand in the cold out of support and to mobilise different sectors for a march out of the support of one individual is dedication. His fans can troll you if you say something unfavourable about him, his fans have the capacity to oppose anything that is anti-Zuma and in some cases they will argue that the former president is not to blame and that our attention should instead be on white monopoly capital. “The organisations say the problem is not the president, but rather white monopoly capital” (Sekhotho 2018). Zuma supporters are on the same level as his chill- they both come second to none.

The former president hardly ever loses his cool, he’s calm most of the time and laughs all the attacks off while still emerging unscathed. A true art, if anything.

Bibliography

Jenson, J., 1992. Fandom as pathology: The consequences of characterization. The adoring audience: Fan culture and popular media, pp.9-29.

Jones, B., 2015. My Little Pony, tolerance is magic: Gender policing and Brony anti-fandom. The Journal of Popular Television, 3(1), pp.119-125.

Ndenze, B. ‘Zuma supporters gather for night vigil ahead of court appearance’. 2018. EWN. Accessed: 10 September 2018. Available at: https://ewn.co.za/2018/07/27/zuma-supports-gather-for-night-vigil-ahead-of-court-appearance

Sekhotho, K. ‘We won’t vote for ANC in 2019’ Hands Off Zuma Movement Threaten’. January 2018. EWN. Accessed: September 10, 2018. Available at: https://ewn.co.za/2018/02/03/hands-off-zuma-movement-threaten-to-not-vote-for-anc-in-2019

[pedimillenial-blog]

Surveillance of the Fittest

I once watched a Ted Talk where Tristan Harris was explaining how new media technologies together with the social media platforms they have created, are all competing for our attention and that our attention is an advantage to them (Harris 2017). They way that Instagram, Facebook, Google, Twitter, Snapchat and Tinder are all able to surveil us and obtain our details is through our attention. As a result of having captured our attention and sustaining it, these entities are able to use that to their advantage in making money out of the information that we give them.

While social media is home to a host of disturbing features, there are some positive aspects of it which cannot be ignored. For instance, in a democracy, social media has enabled citizens a platform to be able to participate more. Media is no longer only consumed by the masses but they can produce it too. It is no longer up to the ruling class alone to disseminate their ideas. However, the focus here is on surveillance and how social media and new media technologies have played a role in allowing surveillance to reach new heights.

We subconsciously provide social media companies like Facebook, Instagram and Twitter with so much of our personal information than we realize. It has become normalized to document every single detail of our lives on social media and we hardly ever stop to consider what really gets done with the information we share. Let’s face it, sure we want to show off to our friends that we're living our best lives but let’s take a moment to reflect if this is actually worth it.

Done? It’s not. Discovering that social media companies like Facebook and Google are able to- beyond what we willing give them- surveil us through our front cameras and microphones is cause enough for moral panics in society to be taken more seriously. What’s crazier about this is that we actually unknowingly give them the permission to do this. Facebook can use legal support for being able to surveil you. Are you familiar with the words “By clicking ‘I agree’ you consent to the terms of service” ?

The terms of service are usually very long documents with tiny writing that, as a result of being uninviting to read, are not usually read at all. As such, there are many terms we are subjected to that we are unaware of. And as such, there are many permissions we have issued to social media companies. What’s more is that if one checks the permissions allocated to certain apps, one is able to see what they have consented to. However, this is in vain because not many people do check their settings to see what the applications on their phones can do. Some applications have access to the microphone and camera of your device. It is through camera and microphones of a device that surveillance can get even worse.

“…Facebook, since that network promotes ‘deception and distraction’ and leads the users to expose themselves, eventually losing awareness of the type and quantity of information they have made available, as well as the number of users accessing this information” (Augusto and Simões 2017: 597). As mentioned above, many of us have reached a point where we are no longer even aware that the content we are posting is too private or that it simply should not be posted online for the world to see. We have become so conditioned to freely giving our information that even when the line is being crossed, we are unable to see it.

While corporates and governments are able to use social media as a tool to surveil users, users can also be culprits of surveilling each other. An example of user-on-user surveillance can be seen in stalking. A watered down version of stalking where perhaps you have a crush on someone and in order to find out more information about that individual you search for them on social media. Social media culture is step up in a way that encourages and to a large extent places pressure on users to keep posting information about their lives. Thus, while competing with other users for likes and the like, we make it easier for us to be surveilled by corporates and governments. Another example of user-on-user surveillance can also be seen in how individuals compete with each other on social media and as such keep tabs on what other users post and how their posts can be better.

The Marxist critique of the media is that it serves the agendas of the ruling class thus spreading propaganda to the ruled classes. Although new media technologies have, through social media, created platforms for more citizens to engage and create content; the hegemony of the ruling class still prevails. We can analyze this from the perspective of surveillance. The dominant structures of the ruling class such as the state and corporates are able to use new media to intensify their surveillance of citizens. Many state intelligence agencies benefit greatly from the platforms created by new media technologies. This is because instead of having to hunt down citizens for their information, the information is readily available. Social media makes it much easier for citizens to be found, even if they do not reveal their true identity online it is still possible to find out information about an individual such as their location through their IP address.

Okay… I’m aware that some of what I’ve mentioned above is concerning and I may even seem to be paranoid. However, I’ll just conclude by saying that my moral panics are justified.

Bibliography

Augusto, F.R. and Simões, M.J., 2017. To see and be seen, to know and be known: Perceptions and prevention strategies on Facebook surveillance. Social Science Information, 56(4), pp.596-618.

Harris, T. 2017. Tristan Harris: How a handful of tech companies control billions of minds everyday. [Video file]. Accessed from: https://www.ted.com/talks/tristan_harris_the_manipulative_tricks_tech_companies_use_to_capture_your_attention?language=en

[pedimillenial-blog]

Deconstructing Selfies

On the surface, selfies seem to be a fairly innocent practice. For some, selfies are a hobby, for others, a passion and a living for others. However, when does it all become too much? When does the art of selfie taking become toxic? When are the lines between the harmless capturing of a moment, narcissism and lack of respect for others, blurred? Although these are rhetorical questions- they make valid points because selfie culture has become a breeding ground for harmful, insensitive and narcissistic practices to take place.

While there are all sorts of negative connotations associated with millennials and their selfie crazed world, let’s start off on a lighter note. Note how I mentioned above that selfie taking is an art? It is. There is much work that goes into the perfect selfie. All sorts of logistics need to be considered. Lighting, background, make-up, filters and the angle of the camera are the basics of a perfect selfie. “Selfies are so popular with young people that they have become a genre unto themselves, with their own visual conventions and clichés. The ‘MySpace angle’, for instance, is the practice of taking a selfie from above, which is said to make the subject look thinner” (Marwick 2015: 141). The art is so difficult to perfect but once you do, it feels a lot like this:

The pressure that comes with selfie culture is immense. One needs to ensure that their selfie has ticked all the boxes of a perfect selfie or otherwise be subjected to a host of negative comments. This is problematic as it is a form of cyber bullying. Many people do not realize that by leaving hurtful comments on other people’s pictures or even by making memes out of other people, they may be bullying. This is called “trolling” and the most common examples of trolling can be found in the comments section under the posts of celebrities. Here's an example of a troll (someone who makes mean comments) on Nicki Minaj's Instagram post:

It is difficult to separate millennials and selfie culture from narcissism. So often are millennials accused for being too selfish and with selfie culture always developing, so do the claims of narcissism.

“The selfie, represents the latest manifestation of the self-portrait, a long standing genre in visual culture” (Iqani and Schroeder 2016: 408). Evidently, it is incorrect to argue that selfies are a completely new phenomenon. They derive from the historic practice of self-portraits. Except, instead of having to sit down for hours for someone else to paint one’s picture, one can take a ‘self-portrait’ in a fraction of the time that would have been used for a picture of themselves. Perhaps, then, it is incorrect to make the argument that narcissism began about 6 years ago with selfie culture. Instead, the argument should be that vanity has always been around and that it has only been brought to our attention with the critique of selfie culture. That being said, millennials are not the only culprits of narcissism. They just have technologies that allow them to be better at it than other generations.

Ah boundaries... there’s always room for the fun to be ruined. As selfie culture evolves and continues to be a key player in social media, certain aspects of it become toxic. For example, the taking of selfies in situations where it is disrespectful, insensitive or completely unnecessary. Another issue with this is that it has become normalized. So often does one see people take pictures at funerals only to post them on Instagram under “#FuneralSelfies”. By the way, have you ever searched Instagram for #FuneralSelfies? When I first did, I initially expected to see pictures of people perhaps outside a church or on the way to a grave site- which I did. What I did not expect to see, but did, was a few selfies of people next to open caskets. This bothered me not only because these selfies completely subverted traditional funeral etiquette but because it just seemed to me to be disrespectful.

Some people are able to make a living out of their social media pages. Their posts generate income for them. Being Instagram famous is one way of being popular and making money out of one’s social media presence. “Apart from an expressive consumer practice, we can think of the selfie as a branding tool, a market research technique and a social media content generator” (Iqani and Schroeder 2016: 411). For those on Instagram looking to pull in profits from their pages, their selfies and posts represent them and help them to express what their brand is all about. For example, once a company sees how popular you are on Instagram and if they feel attracted to your brand, they are more likely to ‘slide in the DM’ and offer you a job to advertise their products or services. Even celebrities- who are not only Instafamous- are able to capitalize on this. Kim Kardashian uses her Instagram page to advertise products for her makeup company- KKW Beauty.

Then again, if you can make money out of being famous- even if it only Instafame, why not?

FOMO is the fear of missing out. But what happens when missing out could have saved your life? There is a saying: “if it wasn’t posted online, did it happen at all?” When FOMO meets selfie culture and selfie culture meets the above saying, A LOT can go wrong. Do we really expect death though? There are people who have died because of selfies. As unbelievable as this may seem, it is tragically true. In 2015, the Daily Mail (www.dailymail.co.uk) posted an article on how an 18 year old girl who was attempting to take a train selfie, died in the process. this unfortunate, painful incident is an example of how toxic selfie culture can be. Most teenager and even adults, on social media, can be so obsessed with showing off how great their lives are in attempt to compete with each other. Sometimes this goes too far as it perpetuates toxicity and FOMO.

Bibliography

Hall, J. ‘Selfie-obsessed Romanian teen burst into flames when she touched live wire while trying to take the 'ultimate' photograph of herself on top of a train's roof.’ May 12, 2015. The Daily Mail. Accessed: September 8, 2018. Available at https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3078178/Romanian-selfie-obsessed-teen-burst-flames-touching-live-wire-climbing-train-ultimate-photo-herself.html 

Iqani, M. and Schroeder, J.E., 2016. # selfie: digital self-portraits as commodity form and consumption practice. Consumption Markets & Culture, 19(5), pp.405-415.

Marwick, A.E., 2015. Instafame: Luxury selfies in the attention economy. Public culture, 27(1 (75)), pp.137-160.