Skip to main content

Interfaces and Engagement: From Implications to Responsibilities

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Future of Audiences

Abstract

I formulate this chapter as a response to an overarching question that this work, and the network it emerged from, has consistently come across. We have often been asked, that, given that there are myriad ways in which agentic audiences engage, respond, interact with and make sense of media technologies, what can audiences can do to resist intrusive interfaces? I select this question, out of all the questions we have been asked, because the question has beckoned us to think carefully about the variety of implications we see emerging out of this project, and why, in the end, we have struggled with the way the question is phrased. In responding, I make use of the implications arising out of CEDAR’s work to expand the focus from what audiences should do, to what a variety of others need to do, in order to champion the interests of audiences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ang, I. (2006). Desperately seeking the audience. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barker, M. (2006). I have seen the future and it is not here yet…; or, on being ambitious for audience research. The Communication Review, 9(2), 123–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barker, M., Arthurs, J., & Harindranath, R. (2001). The Crash controversy: Censorship campaigns and film reception. New York: Wallflower Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baym, N. K. (2015). Personal connections in the digital age. Malden, MA: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bird, S. E. (2003). The audience in everyday life: Living in a media world. New York and London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bird, S. E. (2011). Are we all produsers now? Convergence and media audience practices. Cultural Studies, 25(4–5), 502–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bucher, T. (2017). The algorithmic imaginary: Exploring the ordinary affects of Facebook algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 30–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Ignazio, C., & Bhargava, R. (2015, September). Approaches to building big data literacy. In Proceedings of the Bloomberg Data for Good Exchange Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlgren, P. (1998). Critique: Elusive audiences. In R. Dickinson, R. Harindranath, & O. Linne (Eds.), Approaches to audiences: A reader. London: Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Das, R. (2011). Converging perspectives in audience studies and digital literacies: Youthful interpretations of an online genre. European Journal of Communication, 26(4), 343–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Audiovisual Observatory. (2016). Mapping of media literacy practices and actions in EU-28. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory/European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaun, A., & Velkova, J. (2017). Opening the black box: Challenging algorithms. Paper presented at Digital Democracy: Critical Perspectives in the Age of Big Data Conference, Stockholm, November 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lievrouw, L. A., & Livingstone, S. M. (2006). Introduction to the first edition (2002): The social shaping and consequences of ICTs. In Handbook of new media: Social shaping and social consequences of ICTs (pp. 15–32).

    Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, S. M. (2008). Engaging with media—A matter of literacy? Communication, Culture & Critique, 1(1), 51–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, S. M., & Das, R. (2013). The end of audiences? Theoretical echoes of reception amid the uncertainties of use. In J. Hartley, J. Burgess, & A. Bruns (Eds.), A companion to new media dynamics (pp. 104–121). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, S. M., & Lunt, P. K. (1994). Talk on television: Audience participation and public debate. London: Psychology Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lomborg, S., & Mortensen, M. (2017). Users across media: An introduction. Convergence?, 23, 343–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morley, D. (2006). Unanswered questions in audience research. The Communication Review, 9(2), 101–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radway, J. (1984). Reading the romance: Women, patriarchy, and popular culture. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundin, O. (2017). Critical algorithm literacies: An emerging framework. Paper presented at Digital Culture Meets Data Conference, Brighton, November 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Zoonen, L., et al. (2017). ‘Seeing more than you think’: A ‘data walk’ in the smart city. In S. Hussey (Ed.), Public engagement with the smart city. Bang the Table: Carleton, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ranjana Das .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Das, R. (2018). Interfaces and Engagement: From Implications to Responsibilities. In: Das, R., Ytre-Arne, B. (eds) The Future of Audiences. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75638-7_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics