Yıl 2020, Cilt 6 , Sayı 10, Sayfalar 742 - 765 2020-07-31

Yeni Medya Aptallığı: YouTube Videolarında Aptalca Şeyler Yapmanın ve Söylemenin Ekonomi Politiği
New Media Idiocy: The Political Economy of Doing and Saying Idiotic Things in YouTube Videos

İlker ERDOĞAN [1]


Bu çalışmanın amacı, yeni medya aptallığı kavramı aracılığıyla yeni medya platformu olarak YouTube’daki katılımcı medya kültürünü ve YouTube videolarındaki katılımcı üretkenliği ya da katılımcı performansı incelemek ve tartışmaktır. Yeni medya aptallığı hem aptallığın yeni bir türüdür hem de yeni medyada sahnelenen bir aptallıktır. Yeni medya kültürlerinin ve yeni medyadaki kreatif dijital pratiklerin ürünleri, özellikle popüler YouTube videoları her geçen gün çok daha fazla aptalca görünmektedir. Bu çalışma, Türkiye’de YouTube videolarının üreticileri ile izleyicileri arasında bir dijital geribildirim döngüsünün var olduğunu ve YouTube videoları aracılığıyla internette dolaşıma sokulan aptalca şeylerin neden olduğu dijital geribildirim döngüsü ile bu videolarda aptalca şeyler yapmanın ve söylemenin ekonomi politiği arasında anlamlı bir ilişki olduğunu varsaymaktadır. Bu makalede örnek olay çalışmaları olarak aptalca YouTube videoları niteliksel içerik çözümlemesi yöntemi aracılığıyla çözümlenmektedir. Sonuç olarak Türkiye’de yeni medyadaki aptallık ile çevrimiçi duygu ekonomisindeki ya da duygulanımsal ekonomideki duygusal yoğunlukların dolaşımı arasında bir bağlantı olduğu görülmektedir.
The aim of this study is to examine and discuss participatory media culture on YouTube as a new media platform, and participatory creativity or participatory performance in YouTube videos through the concept of new media idiocy. New media idiocy is both a new kind of idi-ocy and an idiocy performed in new media. The products of new media cultures and creative digital practices in new media, especially popular YouTube videos appear increasingly idiotic. This study supposes that there is a digital feedback loop between producers and viewers of YouTube videos in Turkey, and that there is a significant relationship between the digital feed-back loop that idiotic things circulated on internet through YouTube videos induce and the po-litical economy of doing and saying idiotic things in those videos. In this article, idiotic YouTube videos as its case studies are analyzed by using method of qualitative content analysis. As a result, it seems that there is a connection between the idiocy in new media and the circulation of emotional intensities in online affect economy or affective economy in Turkey.
  • Ahmed, S. (2004a). “Affective Economies”. Social Text 22 (2): 117-139.
  • Ahmed, S. (2004b). Cultural Politics of Emotions. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Andrejevic, M. (2009). “Exploiting YouTube: Contradictions of User-Generated Labor”. The YouTube Reader içinde, editörler P. Snickars ve P. Vonderau, 406-423. Stockholm: National Library of Sweden.
  • Arthurs, J., Drakopoulou, S. ve Gandini, A. (2018). “Researching YouTube”. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 24 (1): 3-15.
  • Bishop, S. (2018). “Anxiety, Panic and Self-optimization: Inequalities and the YouTube Algorithm”. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 24 (1): 69-84.
  • Boxman-Shabtai, L. (2019). “The Practice of Parodying: YouTube as A Hybrid Field of Cultural Production”. Media, Culture&Society 41 (1): 3-20.
  • Burgess, A., Miller, V. ve Moore, S. (2018). “Prestige, Performance and Social Pressure in Viral Challenge Memes: Neknomination, the Ice-Bucket Challenge and SmearForSmear as Imitative Encounters”. Sociology 52 (5): 1035-1051.
  • Burgess, J. ve Green, J. (2013). YouTube: Online Video and Participatory Culture. Cambridge, Malden: Polity Press.
  • Burgess, J. ve Green, J. (2009). “The Entrepreneurial Vlogger: Participatory Culture beyond the Professional-Amateur Divide”. The YouTube Reader içinde, editörler P. Snickars ve P. Vonderau, 89-107. Stockholm: National Library of Sweden.
  • Burgess, J. (2008). “All Your Chocolate Rain are Belong to Us? Viral Video, YouTube and the Dynamics of Participatory Culture”. Video Vortex Reader: Responses to YouTube içinde, editörler G. Lovink ve S. Niederer, 101-109. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Institute of Network Cultures.
  • Clough, P. T. (2008). “The Affective Turn: Political Economy, Biomedia and Bodies”. Theory, Culture&Society 25 (1): 1-22.
  • Curtis, N. (2015). İdiotizm: Kapitalizm ve Hayatın Özelleştirilmesi. Çeviren Mehmet Ratip. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
  • Deleuze, G. (2008). Difference and Repetition. NYC: Continuum.
  • Deleuze, G. (2006). Nietzsche and Philosophy. NYC: Continuum.
  • Deleuze, G. (1999). Foucault. NYC: Continuum.
  • Deleuze, G. ve Guattari, F. (2004). A Thousand Plateaus. NYC: Continuum.
  • Deleuze, G. ve Guattari, F. (1999). What is Philosophy. London, NYC: Verso.
  • Fish, A. ve Srinivasan, R. (2012). “Digital Labor is the New Killer App”. New Media&Society 14 (1): 137-152.
  • Goriunova, O. (2013). “New Media Idiocy”. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 19 (2): 223-235.
  • Gregg, M. (2009). “Learning to (Love) Labour: Production Cultures and the Affective Turn”. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies 6 (2): 209-214.
  • Gülüm, E. (2019). “Geleneksel Kültür, Medya Müzeciliği ve YouTube”. Uluslararası Kıbrıs Üniversitesi Folklor/Edebiyat Dergisi 25 (99): 491-500.
  • Hands, J. (2014). “General Intellect or Collective Idiocy? Digital Mobs and Social Media Mobilization”. Popular Communication: The International Journal of Media and Culture 12 (4): 237-250.
  • Hansen, M. B. N. (2004). New Philosophy for New Media. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
  • Hills, M. (2015). “Veronica Mars, Fandom, and the ‘Affective Economics’ of Crowdfunding Poachers”. New Media&Society 17 (2): 183-197.
  • Jenkins, H., Ford, S. ve Green, J. (2013). Spreadable Media: Creating Value and Meaning in a Networked Culture. New York, London: New York University Press.
  • Juhasz, A. (2009). “Learning the Five Lessons of YouTube: After Trying to Teach There, I Don’t Believe the Hype”. Cinema Journal 48 (2): 145-150.
  • Katz, Y. ve Shifman, L. (2017). “Making Sense? The Structure and Meanings of Digital Memetic Nonsense”. Information, Communication&Society 20 (6): 825-842.
  • Keen, A. (2008). The Cult of the Amateur: How Blogs, MySpace, YouTube, and the Rest of Today’s User-Generated Media Are Killing Our Culture and Economy. London: Nicholas Brealey.
  • Khalikova, D. ve Fish, A. (2016). “Networked Idiots: Affective Economies and Neoliberal Subjectivity in a Russian Viral Video”. Global Media and Communication 12 (2): 143-159.
  • Kim, J. (2012). “The Institutionalization of Youtube: From User-Generated Content to Professionally Generated Content”. Media, Culture&Society 34 (1): 53-67.
  • Kuntsman, A. (2012). “Introduction: Affective Fabrics of Digital Cultures”. Digital Cultures and the Politics of Emotion: Feelings, Affect and Technological Change içinde, editörler A. Karatzogianni ve A. Kuntsman, 1-17. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Langlois, G. (2013). “Participatory Culture and the New Governance of Communication: The Paradox of Participatory Media”. Television&New Media 14 (2): 91-105.
  • Lovink, G. (2011). Networks without a Cause: A Critique of Social Media. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Marwick, A. E. (2013). Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity, and Branding in the Social Media Age. New Haven&London: Yale University Press.
  • McDonagh, P. (2008). Idiocy: A Cultural History. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
  • Mohan, S. ve Punathambekar, A. (2019). “Localizing Youtube: Language, Cultural Regions and Digital Platforms”. International Journal of Cultural Studies 22 (3): 317-333.
  • Morreale, J. (2014). “From Homemade to Store Bought: Annoying Orange and the Professionalization of YouTube”. Journal of Consumer Culture 14 (1): 113-128.
  • Musil, R. (2018). Aptallık Üzerine. Çeviren Ersan Üldes. İstanbul: Sel Yayıncılık.
  • Rieder, B., Matamoros-Fernández, A. ve Coromina, Ò. (2018). “From Ranking Algorithms to ‘Ranking Cultures’: Investigating the Modulation of Visibility in YouTube Search Results”. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 24 (1): 50-68.
  • Rose, G. (2016). “Cultural Geography Going Viral”. Social&Cultural Geography 17 (6): 763-767.
  • Shapiro, A. (2017). “The Medium is the Mob”. Media, Culture&Society 39 (6): 930-941.
  • Shaw, J. K. (2016). “The Life of an Idiot: Artaud and the Dogmatic Image of Thought after Deleuze”. Theory, Culture&Society 33 (7-8): 237-252.
  • Shifman, L. (2014). Memes in Digital Culture. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
  • Shifman, L. (2011). “An Anatomy of a YouTube Meme”. New Media&Society 14 (2): 187-203.
  • Shirky, C. (2010). Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age. New York: The Penguin Press.
  • Stiegler, B. (2015). States of Shock: Stupidity and Knowledge in the 21st Century. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Stiegler, B. (2013a). “Doing and Saying Stupid Things in the Twentieth Century: Bêtise and Animality in Deleuze and Derrida”. Angelaki: Journal of the Theoretical Humanities 18 (1): 159-174.
  • Stiegler, B. (2013b). What Makes Life Worth Living: On Pharmacology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Stiegler, B. (2012). Politik Ekonominin Yeni Bir Eleştirisi İçin. Çeviren Elyesa Koytak. İstanbul: Monokl Yayınları.
  • Stiegler, B. (2010). Taking Care of Youth and the Generations. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  • Stiegler, B. (2009). “The Carnival of the New Screen: From Hegemony to Isonomy”. The YouTube Reader içinde, editörler P. Snickars ve P. Vonderau, 40-59. Stockholm: National Library of Sweden.
  • Strangelove, M. (2010). Watching YouTube: Extraordinary Videos by Ordinary People. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
  • Ten Bos, R. (2007). “The Vitality of Stupidity”. Social Epistemology 21 (2): 139-150.
  • Van Boxsel, M. (2012). Aptallık Ansiklopedisi. Çeviren Gül Özlen. İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
  • Van Dijck, J. (2013). The Culture of Connectivity: A Critical History of Social Media. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Van Es, K. (2020). “YouTube’s Operational Logic: ‘The View’ as Pervasive Category”. Television&New Media 21 (3): 223-239.
  • Vonderau, P. (2016). “The Video Bubble: Multichannel Networks and the Transformation of YouTube”. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 22 (4): 361-375.
  • Wasko, J. ve Erikson, M. (2009). “The Political Economy of YouTube”. The YouTube Reader içinde, editörler P. Snickars ve P. Vonderau, 372-386. Stockholm: National Library of Sweden.
  • Webster, J. G. (2017). “Three Myths of Digital Media”. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 23 (4): 352-361.
  • Webster, J. G. ve Ksiazek, T. B. (2012). “The Dynamics of Audience Fragmentation: Public Attention in an Age of Digital Media”. Journal of Communication 62 (1): 39-56.
Birincil Dil tr
Konular İletişim
Bölüm Makale
Yazarlar

Orcid: 0000-0002-6690-4681
Yazar: İlker ERDOĞAN (Sorumlu Yazar)
Kurum: IZMIR KATIP CELEBI UNIVERSITY
Ülke: Turkey


Tarihler

Başvuru Tarihi : 5 Mart 2020
Kabul Tarihi : 12 Haziran 2020
Yayımlanma Tarihi : 31 Temmuz 2020

APA Erdoğan, İ . (2020). Yeni Medya Aptallığı: YouTube Videolarında Aptalca Şeyler Yapmanın ve Söylemenin Ekonomi Politiği . TRT Akademi , 6 (10) , 742-765 . Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/trta/issue/56639/699139