MEDIATIZATION

Datafication, automation and communicative AI: Toward a redefinition of mediatization research

Andreas Hepp

The origins of mediatization research were closely tied to the study of mass communication. Mass media were initially conceptualized as an independent field, system or domain whose “logic” increasingly diverged from the “logics” of other societal domains (Hjarvard 2013; Lundby 2009; Strömbäck & Esser 2014). While this clear delineation partly explains the appeal of early approaches to mediatization research, extensive criticism soon emerged. On one hand, the criticism was directed at the reductionist institutionalist thinking underlying such an oblique abstraction (e.g., Couldry & Hepp 2016). On the other, this criticism was empirically grounded: media change persisted after the advent of electronic mass media, and the generalization of previously rich, or thick, processes was not adequately equipped to capture the increasing ubiquity and comprehensive societal saturation associated with digital media and their infrastructures (see the discussion in Kopecka-Piech & Bolin 2023).

In my talk, I will address and expand upon this criticism. Media change has not stopped with the emergence of digitalization and datafication. Building on the variety of digital traces left behind by contemporary media users, we are witnessing, and collaborating in, the progressive automation of communication. The current state of communicative AI, such as ChatGPT, represents just the beginning. As I would like to show, mediatization research that does justice to this transformation must not only abandon narrow thinking in terms of “logics”. In today’s media environments, we must question which original concepts of mediatization research—strongly linked to the investigation of non-digital mass communication—are still valid at all. With the introduction of communicative AI, it becomes necessary to fundamentally rethink agency, media, and communication and their relation to societal transformation. If mediatization research is to address these recent changes, it must engage much more deeply with questions around the “consequences” of specific media. In my talk, I will illustrate what this might entail.

References:
Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2016). The mediated construction of reality. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hjarvard, S. (2013). The mediatization of culture and society. London: Routledge.
Kopecka-Piech, K., & Bolin, G. (Eds.). (2023). Contemporary Challenges in Mediatisation Research. London: Routledge.
Lundby, K. (2009). Media logic: Looking for social interaction. In K. Lundby (Ed.), Mediatization: Concept, changes, consequences (pp. 101-119). New York: Peter Lang.
Strömbäck, J., & Esser, F. (2014). Mediatization of politics: Towards a theoretical framework. In F. Esser & J. Strömbäck (Eds.), Mediatization of politics. Understanding the transformation of Western democracies (pp. 3-28). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.