The Exchange

Sheldon Cooper, The Big Bang Theory, Season 2 Episode 11 (2008).

Human society is built on a concept of exchange, as Letche (2003) wrote, “exchanges can constitute the very fabric of society itself” often things of equal value are exchanged in day to day life, whether this is monetary exchange or an exchanging of gifts, this concept of essentially swapping things is at the core of human interactions.

The idea of gift-giving may seem harmless but as Sheldon, a character on The Big Bang Theory points out, “the foundation of gift-giving is reciprocity. You haven’t given me a gift. You’ve given me an obligation,” (Big Bang Theory, 2008). When exchanging gifts people often strive to give something back of equal value either emotionally, or as mentioned earlier, equal in price in order to display proper social etiquette. As Mauss (1990), states “...there are no formal rules attaching to gift exchange, only a sense of honour or (moral) shame if the gift is not reciprocated at some point in the future, immediate reciprocation being unacceptable,” this moral shame often makes people feel obligated, as Sheldon said, to give something back of equal value for social acceptance, this is known as Reciprocal Exchange.

Reciprocal Exchange is not just limited to gift-giving, it can also be seen in relation to social media. The “follow for a follow/like for a like” culture that dominated social media for quite a number of years is an excellent example of Reciprocal Exchange. The common practise that following someone you know, or have mutual friends with will follow you back boosting both of your follower counts, and perhaps even likes. This was not just the case for people who knew each other IRL, but also for complete strangers, who often put Follow for a Follow in their descriptions on Instagram, this practise has fallen out of favour however, with people being more cautious with strangers on the internet for fear of what could happen, the risk far outweighed the reward. People also experience Reciprocal Exchange through comments and likes on their posts, they are exchanging themselves online through photos, videos, captions, etc… in exchange for the attention and gratification provided by their followers.

People’s attention is often referred to as a limited commodity, and in the lecture, Victoria discussed the idea of “The Attention Economy,” which is the concept of viewing this commodity, as one that companies will pay money to capture. This is often seen online or on T.V with companies paying for ads in order to attract potential buyers. There is a case of Reciprocal Exchange as well as “Attention Economy” between companies and T.V stations, radio stations, social media platforms, social media influencers, etc. When companies pay the aforementioned platforms to play an advert or endorse a product, they are paying for a part of the “Attention Economy” and in turn receive buyers, thus there is a reciprocal exchange between companies and the platforms. This “Attention Economy” has become an important tool for advertising and selling products.

The “Attention Economy” and Reciprocal exchange are just two example of exchange online, and just in the case of gift-giving, are the act of exchanging something of equal value, whether this is monetarily or socially. At the very core of human society, there is the concept and action of exchange, this practise has shifted from real world applications to online versions, and can be seen everywhere.

References: 

blabclub. (January 3rd 2010). Big Bang Theory. Christmas Gift. [video] Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdnGJszQgic&t=110s 

blabclub. (January 3rd 2010). Big Bang Theory. Christmas Gift. [image] Screencapped at 8.13 minutes. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdnGJszQgic&t=110s 

Kuttainen, V. (2019). BA1002: Our Space: Networks, Narratives, and the Making of Place, week 8 notes [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from https://learn.jcu.edu.au/ultra/courses/_90219_1/outline/edit/document/_3374898_1?courseId=_90219_1 

Lechte, J. (2003). Exchange. Key contemporary concepts. London, UK: Sage UK. https://elibrary.jcu.edu.au/login?url=https://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/sageukcc/exchange/0?institutionId=429 

Mauss, Marcel (1990 [1923-24]) The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies, trans. Halls, W. D. Routledge London. Retrieved from https://search-credoreference-com.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/content/entry/sageukcc/exchange/0 

Who is It?

On a social media platform, like Facebook, the world is their oyster or in this case their ‘virtual world’ is their oyster. A person has the power to create their ideal self who is not influences by their reality self. They create the perfect character, a flawless person which in reality is an impossible feat.

                                                                       Figure 1. Super human, (Willis, S., 2018).

In reality nobody is perfect, as a society no matter what culture, language, or gender once is, we are all imperfect. Virtual reality give us a control that we may never have in our real reality, we as humans can not choose what gender we are born, we cannot choose what country we are born, we cannot choose who we are born from, in reality we have very little choice. In reality, or our perception of reality, we are influenced by a number of things culture, language, or religions. We are created by our ideals outside, sometimes forced or pressured by others to be this person we for their ideals. Homosexuals hide their interest in same gender relationships. Transsexuals deny and hide their feelings of wrongness in their own body, ignoring their feelings of belonging to a different gender. Different raced people feel ashamed of themselves due to skin colour from racism surrounding their environment. This all happens in their perception of reality.

However, social media platforms like Facebook allows us to create this perfect virtual reality, we can become our ‘ideal’ selves, running and hiding from all the influencers in our perceived reality. We are given this unimaginable power, a way to escape the real world.

Facebook creates a virtual hyperreal world. People can edit images; share said images and create this ideal person for audiences to believe this is the real them. This concept relates to Jean Baudrillard’s theory. On social media areas like Facebook people can exchange images, stories, or personas that are not real, but an exaggerated comparison to reality.

With this people have the authority to be somebody they are not or somebody they want to become but are too afraid to be so in reality.

Having control over our virtual selves on Facebook however also includes negative power over others through manipulation. Some use these virtual reality ‘worlds’ to prey on others. Such as scammers on the unsuspecting, in other words catfishing. Facebook can create these powerful virtual reality ‘villains’.

Overall, Facebook is a platform has the control for others to live this perfect life on a virtual reality platform. We can create accounts and become an online identity of who we want to be. This creates a positive space in allowing those who are hiding in reality to be seen as who they want to be in virtual reality. However, with this positive control comes negative influence, of those creating the perfect ‘virtual reality identity’ to prey on others.  

References

Kuttainen, V. (2019). BA1002: Our space: networks, narratives and the making of place, lecture week 7: Virtual reality vs reality. Retrieved from: https://www.jcu.edu.au.

Willis, S. (2018). Super human [image]. Retrieved from https://www.vitalsmarts.com/crucialskills/2018/05/what-to-do-when-perceptions-arent-reality/

The Exchanging Games

The more popular a person becomes, the more that person is exchanging their “real” self to an online persona. When becoming successful or ‘more well-known’ on social media one must give up or in other words exchange privacy for popularity.

                                                       Figure 1. Social Media Scribble (Dreamstime, 2019).

People are now ‘marketing’ themselves online through the means of social media by exchanging their privacy for popularity. This is exemplified mostly through the younger generation as many believe being popular equals success, and the more successful one is the wealthier one is.

When sacrificing privacy for popularity, one must become visible in the online world. For this to happen one must see their social media platforms, like Facebook, an extension of themselves. They must post pictures of where they are/were showing their location, they must inform the audience of what they were/are doing in a way that needs to captivate their audience into following them. They must be presentable, social, and ‘social media perfect’ to gain popularity and power over the audience. This is all mainly done to gain, as mentioned before, sponsorships.

When entering an online social media environment such as Facebook, many are confronted with sponsorships (or advertisements) from their ‘followed’ people. This is a demonstration of George Simmel’s explanation of exchange: “exchange supposes an objective measurement of subjective valuations” (Lechte, 2003). Facebook is one big exchange hub. Exchange is a big network play in networking people together on Facebook. It is a never-ending cycle of exchange and networking. In other words, one must network to exchange. One major aspect of a cycle exemplified through Facebook is: in sacrificing privacy means a higher chance of gaining and audience, having a higher audience means having more popularity and influence over others. The second major aspect of the cycle is: popularity gains attention from sponsorships which means income for the person who agrees to said sponsorship. And to complete the cycle: is for the sponsorship to reach out to influencers, then for the influencers to agree to a deal which includes profit, afterward the influencers markets the sponsorship on their Facebook page to the audience they have, and lastly for the audience to purchase said sponsorship product. This exchange cycle repeats itself repeatedly on Facebook, it is a nonstop cycle.  

This takes us to the Facebook economy production in online businesses. Exchanging is experienced through this economy from the notion of giving and receiving. It maintains the ‘reciprocity’ of exchange: the circulation of goods.

To conclude, by a person exchanging their privacy for popularity creates greater audience which sponsorships between them and the influencers, with create economic value between them and between the sponsorship and the audience.

References

Dreamstime (2019). Social media scribble [image]. Retrieved from https://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photography-social-media-scribble-refers-to-interaction-people-which-create-share-exchange-information-ideas-image38760997

Kuttainen, V. (2019). BA1002: Our space: networks, narratives and the making of place, lecture week 8: Exchange. Retrieved from: https://www.jcu.edu.au.

Lechte, J. (2003). Key contemporary concepts: exchange, 1. Retrieved from https://search-credoreference-com.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/content/entry/sageukcc/exchange/0

Mescon, J. (2019). Native advertising institute. Retrieved from

https://nativeadvertisinginstitute.com/blog/facebook-sponsored-posts/

I’ll read your blog, if you read mine?

Image 1: Dwight Schrute on getting a [pay] raise (2007).

This week’s enlightening lecture discussed the intricacies of exchange and addressed the theories of a “gift economy” (Mauss) and the various forms of “capital” as defined by Pierre Bourdieu. The topic was not necessarily discussing conflict theory or money as the root of evil but, more so, forms of capitol that exist outside the restraints of physical value. Mauss and Malinowski highlighted the social power that drives cultures to give gifts. They observed that certain island tribes would travel great expanses with the sole purpose of gifting shells to another tribe. Although this act provided no economic gain, the gift-giver would obtain a level of “social prestige” among their two tribes. Lechte provides a clear criticism of the gift economy in Key contemporary concepts (2003); “These are not societies of utility (where the usefulness of something, or its instrumental value, is the dominant criterion), but societies of mutual obligation, based on intimate, effective relations.”

The purpose of this particular blog is to note the relationship between Bourdieu’s concepts of capitol and Instagram’s gift economy culture. Instagram, as an environment of capitol commerce largely gravitates towards the sectors of social and sexual capitol. Where, as discussed within previous blog editions, the major focus of content consumption and creation over the platform revolves around a heightened sexual prowess and the conveying of a higher-than-thou class classification. Further, with respect to the methods of transferring this “social currency,” Instagram’s like system has evolved into an economy of reciprocal affirmations. One must consider these “likes” as units of status.

On the forefront of this phenomenon, as they have been with most-to all contemporary internet developments; millennials are the new age oil barons of old. Millennials, making up the majority of Instagram’s user base, are the very best at accruing likes and developing the most robust social capitol schemes… or business’, if you will. As mentioned in afore blogs, this online presence is driven by an insatiable urge to satisfy oneself with the knowledge that society/Instagram’s online community not only accepts you but believes you are exceptionally acceptable. This society is “built on prestige” (Kuttainen, 2019). Furthermore, that prestige is measured by the number of and frequency of reception of likes per photograph/post.

I pose the answer to a question that has stumped concerned, conservative careers across the globe since about 2006; “why do you [children] spend all your time on those silly devices?” Simply; it pays off. Albeit, not necessarily in a traditional financial or intellectual respect but in the form of social capitol which may be converted into economic capitol. However, not quite so for your average Joe – or Jess – but for the very best players of the game; quite so.

The name of the game is; “like for a like.”

The exposure that is generated from acquiring a network of followers exceeding 10-15 thousand is astronomical and the grass-roots basis of building such an enormous network is the process of reciprocal “altruism” (McCullogh, 2008). Two parties mutually agree that they will mass “like” each other’s content providing both parties with increased exposure; as Instagram’s algorithms bias content that is favored (liked) by the userbase. Generally, this process can be repeated often enough for content to be spread and consumed by users outside of ones pre-existing follower base. Similarly, to other modes of mass exposure, individuals rapidly become famous. Instagram’s influencers are masters of the social network system and have recently begun to convert their social capitol, accrued on Instagram, into economic capitol via celebrity brand endorsement.

References:

Dwight Schrute on getting a pay raise [Image 1]. (2007). Retrieved from https://www.reddit.com/r/austrian_economics/duplicates/97avdi/dwight_schrute_always_knew/

Kuttainen, V. (2019). BA1002: Our Space: Networks, Narrative and the Making of Place, week 8 notes [PowerPoint Slides]. Retrieved from https://learn.jcu.edu.au/ultra/courses/_97532_1/outline

CorporateFinanceInstitute.com, (2019). Retrieved from https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/economics/conflict-theory/

The Guardian. (2012, July 30^th). Charles Eisenstein: “In a gift economy the more you give, the richer you are.” Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6S1egXWYwXo

Exchange. (2003). In J. Lechte, Key contemporary concepts. London, UK: Sage UK. Retrieved from https://elibrary.jcu.edu.au/login?url=https://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/sageukcc/exchange/0?institutionId=429

Association for Psychological Science. (2008). In McCullogh, M., Kimeldorf, M., Cohen, A., An Adaptation for Altruism. Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00590.x?casa_token=couM9sVx_18AAAAA%3AUmzrreY_e1FPS6qCSbfqpDc8mGj3afISBzKAwsFy0O5WNy6LicK5qZEa9dMNWVKaLVPmZ_vbM71aAA

The Capital of Facebook

Facebook is a social network of grand proportions. It is virtually a reality all in itself. So it becomes almost immediately obvious the multiple forms of capital at play within the social media platform and the roles they play. Capital has many differing definitions, however, the kind of capital at play on Facebook is that of Economic Capital, Social Capital, Cultural Capital and Symbolic Capital. These forms of capital can be seen in the non digital world everywhere and even by name may seem obvious, but Facebook manages to have them more subtly, yet once seen are unseeable. 

Facebook’s Economic Capital is obvious through the blatant advertising everywhere over the site. Everyone is bound to come across advertisements between at least every 5-10 posts, or at least a post by a company about a new product. This is how Facebook makes money as a company. Another point to make about economic capital on Facebook is through American users having their political party shown on Facebook, of which it never asks for. Wait, that comes under social capital as well?!

Damn straight, Facebook has algorithms that helped target certain American’s to vote a specific way based on what it thought they would vote for. Aside from that, Facebook was built on the foundation of social capital. It is a social media after all, it is meant for social interactions in the virtual reality. This obviously is a good and bad thing when it comes to the kinds of people there are in the real world and the seemingly wild west frontier the internet is at the current stage of it.

Cultural Capital comes into play through specific communities that talk on behalf of an interest or belief that the members of the group have. These communities showcase its members cultural expertise within the area, and allows them to express feelings towards it. Whilst this does also come under social capital, it also is cultural capital because of that expertise shown in areas of interest, and even the wealth of general information on Facebook, everyone has the ability to learn about a variety of things and build their culture.

Symbolic Capital is just Facebook as a whole, Facebook is Facebook, everyone knows what Facebook is and has the ability to join and be apart of the above capitals, symbolic capital encompasses all of the capitals at play on Facebook because symbolic capital is Facebook as a whole.

So to conclude, Facebook is a virtual reality where multiple forms of capital is at play. Capitals we as users helped create.

Jake Skuse

The Business of Instagram

Have you ever scrolled down your feed on Instagram and come across someone you know or an influencer promoting how amazing a product is, this would be one example of exchange on social media. “The evolution of social media into a robust mechanism for social transformation is already visible. Despite many adamant critics who insist that tools like Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube are little more than faddish distractions useful only to exchange trivial information, these critics are being proven wrong time and time again” (Mainwaring, 2011).

Social media following is a serious business, the more followers you have, the more sponsorships you gain. Influencers are what make social media a big market for advertisers. Social media has become a lucrative asset to consumers and business a like. The consumer being the influencer, receives goods in exchange for exposure and business’ get major advertisement and often sales  through the influencer’s promotion. Usually no money is exchanged it is the gifted product for the exposure on an influencers profile. Claude Lévi-Strauss (1987) shows that for some societies as a whole, and for some Western societies in part, the form of the act of exchange is more important than what is exchanged. An example of this could be an influencer that is a swimmer and posts lots of pictures wearing swimwear in various exotic locations, a swimwear business might take interest in this influencer to promote their new line of bikinis for the summer. If the exchange is accepted both parties benefit, the consumer/influencer gains free swimwear and the company has gained instant exposure to thousands of consumers thus having relatively free advertisement for increased sales.

(An influencer promoting a product, 2018)

This type of advertising or exposure has become a major avenue for business, so much so   Influencers are relying on influencer agencies to help them land sponsorships. Joe Gagliese the co-founder of the influencer agency Viral Nation mentions, that Youtube and Instagram are the top platforms that companies pay influencers to create content and exposure for their products. Influencers are then able to engage and relate with their audience easily in order to promote products. They are considered to make a pretty big impact, especially influencers who have a large following. Influencers who have a contract are withheld from buying followers, as marketers don’t often know what bought followers look like so the influencer could be sued by doing so.

People aren’t getting paid for these endorsements, they are only receiving products in order to help increase sales for the business’. Depending on the brand, the influencer might gain popularity from the product they are promoting. Most of the famous influencers are often young, and millennials, they are also the main targets for companies who want to use influencers to promote their brand.

People don’t use real money to gain status or goods, it is the act of exchange that is more important. The endorsement exposure for the company and the benefit of free products for the influencer out weighs monetary gain, for they both obtain further benefits such as an increase in sales and popularity.

References

Kuttainen, V. (2019). BA1002: Our Space: Networks, narratives and the making of place, Lecture Slides 8: Exchange. Retrieved from http://learnjcu.edu.au

Lechte, J. (2003). Exchange. Key Contemporary Concepts. Retrieved from https://search-credoreference-com.elibrary.jcu.edu.au

Lieber, C. (2018). How and why do influencers make so much money? The head of an influencer agency explains. Vox. Retrieved from, https://www.vox.com/the-goods

Bargaining Likes

'Exchange supposes an objective measurement of subjective valuations,' (George Simmel, 1990).

Instagram has been known to influence the younger people of today, their perceptions of themselves, those around them and society as a whole. Accordingly, a way that people may and can be influenced or be the influencer, is by financial status or gain and the goods associated with this.
There are three specific forms of exchange pointed out by Karl Polyaniin in 2003, as stated in The Networks, Narrative and the Making of Place lecture content. These are known as reciprocal (literal exchange between individuals and/groups), redistributive (fees paid to a third party) and finally, market exchange, which is the exchange of money for goods and services. Two of the types of exchanges shown, reciprocal and market exchange, to a certain extent, are relevant to the financial status of social media influencers, especially, and may essentially dictate what and how they utilise their social media platforms.

In reference to the reciprocal exchange, these specific influencers may decide to partner with a company, by way of sponsorship, in order to gain exposure for the company's products and possibly for themselves as well. The individuals promoting these products tend to be very biased in favour of the products and of the company because of the free commodities and possibly, money involved for the influencers.

(Kim Kardashian: published Instagram post sponsored by SugarBear Hair, 2016)

Additionally, referencing market exchange, this form can be shown in the way that social media influencers use each others' social popularity to boost their own popularity amongst the app's users and in society as well. This can be seen in the way that individually known social media celebrities, such as Liza Koshy, with 17.9 million followers on Instagram and Lilly Singh, with followers that reach 9 million respectively, all attended the world-renown event, Vidcon, enticing the hearts of 30, 000 young, teenage watchers and admirers with single tickets that reached $850.

By utilising these types of exchange methods, these celebrities of Instagram and of smaller-known apps are able to push themselves to the top of the 'food-chain', so to speak, and so, by maintaining their position, they increase the amount of money that they make by paid partnerships, becoming representatives or ambassadors of companies or just simply being engaging with and towards their audiences.
For some social media influencers, the entirety of their one account has become their work and ultimately, possibly their life. Some of these people spend years building up their accounts, their likes and follows and expect for it to become their source of income - and for the lucky few, it's worked. Some influencers have been found, at the beginning of the careers, to purchase well-known goods to review, in order to boost their exposure of their channels and accounts. They tend to spend so much of their time, effort and their lives aiming for better and more exposure of themselves in the app, creating so much focus on this 'virtual reality' and not of the reality around us. Could this essentially become a pressing issue for the youth of today, and one day, create a concerning lack of understanding of realistic problems around them?




References:

Exchange. (2003). In J. Lechte, Key contemporary concepts. London, UK: Sage UK. Retrieved from https://elibrary.jcu.edu.au/login?url=https://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/sageukcc/exchange/0?institutionId=429

Kutaiinen, V. (2019). BA1002: Our Space: Networks, Narratives and the Making of Place. Week 8 Notes. [power point slides]. James Cook University, Townsville. 

Oakes, O. Kim Kardashian: published Instagram post sponsored by SugarBear Hair (2016). [Image]
https://www.campaignlive.com/article/celebrities-charge-143000-average-sponsored-videos/1407475

Social, Cultural, and Symbolic Capital in ResearchGate

Researchers using ResearchGate as a networking tool engage in an exchange of capital in the form Social, Cultural, and Symbolic capital. Social Capital 

Reference List

Kuttainen, V.(2019) BA1002:Our Space: Networks,Narratives, and the Making of Place [PowerPoint file] Retrieved from https://learn.jcu.edu.au

The Capital investors of YouTube

In the world of online social media networks social capital reigns supreme. From Instagram stars trying to maintain a good image in order to sell products, to social commentators on websites like Facebook and Twitter who try to maintain an image in order to be taken seriously by their readers. YouTube, however, is a social media network that is inundated with exchange in various forms. The income of the website is built on advertisements which are shown at the start of videos which are approved by the companies who own the ads. This alone causes YouTube creators to have to mould their content in order to appeal to these advertising companies, and appeal to YouTube itself and the community of the website.

French Sociologist Mauss proposed the idea of a gift economy in his short book The Gift after observing “the potlatch in North America or the kula in the Pacific, and the hau in New Zealand.” (Lechte, 2003) In these social events gifts would be exchanged between groups with the expectation of reciprocation in the future. As John Lechte writes in his article on Exchange “For Mauss, the gift is the very foundation of social life in many non-capitalist societies. Even in capitalist societies…there were remnants of older social forms: in the presents given at Christmas, birthdays and marriages”. (Lechte, 2003) Another French sociologist, Bourdieu “built on Mauss’s ideas about exchange being based on the transaction of symbolic forms of value that structure relationships… by redefining all kinds of relationships as based on transactions of capital” (Kuttainen, 2019) The forms of capital Bourdieu describes are Economic Capital, Social Capital, Cultural Capital and Symbolic Capital. (Kuttainen, 2019)

Figure One: Gift Economy. (n.d.)

The question is how do Mauss and Bourdieu’s ideas of a gift economy and social capital apply to social media networks like YouTube in its creators’ interactions with other creators, their viewers and the website itself?

YouTube content creators, often being so important to their own content, must maintain a good image within their community in order to gain a large following and therefore, more views on their content. Many larger content creators on YouTube will often hold charity events where they will donate money they make from a video or do a livestream where all donations go to a specific charity. This is done as a way of “giving back to the community” in order to maintain a good social image and generate social capital in their community.

An example of this that I found interesting was earlier this month (September 2019) the YouTuber Felix Kjellberg, better known as PewDiePie announced he was donating $50,000 to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), an organisation that works to combat discrimination. Felix did this to separate himself from past controversies which led to accusations of racism, and to separate himself from the shooter in the Christchurch Tragedy saying “subscribe to PewDiePie” before beginning the shooting. (Kelly, 2019) In this action Felix attempted to regain lost social capital with fans who would be turned away by these controversies. This attempt to restore social capital, however, caused more controversy as Felix received backlash from his fans as in previous years the ADL had denounced him because of past controversies. This led to Felix withdrawing the donation to the ADL and pledging to find another charity in order to gain social capital with his fans, who he had lost social capital with to gain social capital.

Another way we can see the exchange of social capital on YouTube is when we see large creators using their position to help promote smaller creators whether by sharing their channel on other social media networks or collaborating with these creators on a video. Because of this larger creators gain social capital with their fans, the fans of whichever smaller channel they are promoting or collaborating with, and the YouTube community as a whole who may likely perceive the act as generous or kind. In turn smaller creators will be able to have a larger audience view their work which will help them gain social capital within the community while the gain in viewers will also increase the number of eyes watching their videos, which means more advertisement revenue.

Creators on YouTube must gain social capital with the YouTube community, and often the wider online community, in order to gain fans and views on their content so they are able to make traditional capital, money, from what they do and create a career out of making content on the network.

Written by Callum Hawkins

References:

Kuttainen, V. (2019). BA1002: Our space: Networks, narratives and the making of place, week 8 notes [PowerPoint slides]. College of Arts, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia. Retrieved from https://learn.jcu.edu.au/ultra/courses/_97532_1/outline

Lechte, J. (2003). Exchange. Retrieved from https://search-credoreference-com.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/content/entry/sageukcc/exchange/0

Kelly, M. (2019). PewDiePie pledges $50,000 to the Anti-Defamation League, spurring bizarre conspiracy theories. Retrieved from https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/11/20860553/pewdiepie-felix-kjellberg-adl-donation-anti-defamation-league-conspiracy-theories-50000

Figure One: Gift Economy [image]. (n.d.) Retrieved from https://www.shareable.net/how-to-host-a-conference-gift-economy-style/

Microexchanges

Gaming has become one of the most favoured things for both youth and adults to do for fun in the contemporary age, lets have a look at how the act of exchange is in the gaming world. A new age of gaming has emerged in recent years, an age where the highest grossing games make their money not through games sales, but through microtransactions. Games like Fortnite, Candy Crush Saga and League of Legends are among the highest grossing games in history and users didn’t spend a cent to be to play them, instead the game companies make their money from users buying in-game items. The entire system likens itself to capital exchange outlined by Marx and later Bourdieu and pays no homage to gift society (Lecthe, 2003).

There are two ways that microtransactions are implemented, the first is the widely accepted, use to buy in-game cosmetic items and the other is notoriously dubbed “pay-to-win”. Bourdieu’s ideas of capital and exchange (Kuttainen, 2019) fit right into the use of these microtransactions. Buying cosmetic items shows an economic capital exchange to social capital where, in “pay-to-win” games economic capital is exchanged for cultural capital, essentially giving the person who spends money an upper hand. Imagine a game of chess, cosmetic items will change how my pieces look but the gameplay stays the same, while “pay-to-win” games give you the ability to spend real money to create an unfair advantage, say upgrade one of my pawns to a better piece.

However, I wouldn’t say online cosmetic items don’t come without their own problems, although they are essentially just clothes or jewellery - something to make your character look better, in the real/physical world, anything you buy can be sold or traded but this isn’t exactly possible with virtual items. The digital game distribution platform Steam is the largest and most popular of its kind on PC, owning the rights of distribution of thousands of games, it is the home for most PC gamers. Steam is basically an online marketplace for games, it has a shop to buy games and a community page where groups of game enthusiasts can interact, including a market where you can trade cosmetic items for Steam funds. The platform holds its own currency meaning you must add funds to the platform in order to buy games and items, the exchange is 1-1 with USD. Its easy to think of this like international currency exchange but it isn’t quite the same, once you exchange for the platform’s ‘money’ there is no way to exchange back. This is the norm for games and gaming platforms and obviously is stated in the terms and conditions when you purchase Steam funds. Though this doesn’t seem like such a big deal but when you consider the cost of some items being sold on the platform it makes you wish you could cash out on it. This Dota 2 cosmetic item for the game’s ‘courier’ sold on the steam marketplace for $38,000!

Ethereal Flames Pink War Dog [Image]. Retrieved from https://successstory.com/spendit/most-expensive-virtual-items-in-video-games

Kuttainen, V. (2019). BA1002: Our Space: Networks, narratives and the making of place, Lecture 8: Exchange. [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from http://learnjcu.edu.au

Lechte, J. (2003). Key contemporary concepts: From abjection to Zeno's paradox. Sage.

EXCHANGE WITHOUT CONSCIENCE

EXCHANGE WITHOUT CONSCIENCE by Lily Heery

Hello fellow bloggers, today I would like to talk about someone/people I have left out of my previous blogs, the consumer companies present on Instagram. We have discussed the influencers and promoters, the buys and followers, now it’s time to talk about the big businesses of Instagram.

Fundamental business model and marketing of their products revolve around human capital. These influencers are randomly selected they are engaged on the basis of their popularity. These people earn their sponsorship by manipulating the emotions of a broad base of the social media, engaging narcissistic behaviour, essentially the raw emotions of lack of self- work. These companies are not prepared to sell their products are not prepared to sell their product on the basis of their performance but rather on the basis of how engaging the promoters are.

Now, in relation to exchange we can take a look back at previous blogs and lectures regarding networks and space and place. Without even realising it, I have already discussed in great deal the notion of exchange present on Instagram. According to Mind Jumpers, a community management consulting company, 64 percent of smartphone users turn to their phones to shop – and most of them look for reviews and recommendations from a number of social media sources to help them make their buying decisions.  I made this chart to demonstrate how this concept exists and how we are interconnected through exchange.

Figure 1: Diagram depicting the interactions and exchange of corporations, e- consumers and promoters/influencers on Instagram.

In reference to the diagram I made above you can see that there is exchange regarding social and monetary capital between each group, however this exchange is not reciprocal. The exchange between the consumer and promoter is monetary, the exchange between the promoter and consumer is emotive and conceptual, which is converted into monetary exchange between the consumer and the corporation. Whilst the players in this exchange by definition the product and services are truly only representative of the promoter’s popularity whose loyalty is only measured by recompense provided by corporations.  

With reference to this week’s reading another stance on the matter is that Instagram is reciprocal an exchange and can be considered a society of the gift. “Marcel Mauss, who initiated an interest in exchange through his study of the gift (Mauss 1990). What Mauss was able to show was that some societies could be called societies of the gift, because a gift called for a counter-gift. Every effort would have to be made to meet obligations of reciprocity, even if this is not entirely transparent to the participants themselves.” With this logic in mind we could consider Instagram a gift society with reciprocal exchange as he influencers receive free products from companies to endorse and create content, the consumers buy from a popular influencer thus establishing themselves in a prominent social position and the companies profit from the consumers, all receiving gifts which relate to their aspirations in social media space and network.  

List of references

Exchange. (2003). In J. Lechte, Key contemporary concepts. London, UK: Sage UK. Retrieved September 2019, from https://elibrary.jcu.edu.au/login?url=https://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/sageukcc/exchange/0?institutionId=429

Ray, L. (2018). How Does Social Media Influence the Buying Behavior of Consumers? Retrieved September 2019, from Advertising, Marketing & Media: https://smallbusiness.chron.com/social-media-influence-buying-behavior-consumers-61504.html