Accounts of our digital future, both optimistic and dystopian, are often founded on three myths: users are in charge, big data is neutral and people will opt to live in enclaves. This article describes and challenges those myths. As an alternative, it posits a dynamic model of the digital media marketplace in which users, media and metrics constantly interact. It concludes by arguing that the structural features of the marketplace play an important role in shaping crossmedia encounters and inviting readers to consider the power of media to reshape preferences.
AalbergTBlekesauneAElvestadE (2013) Media choice and informed democracy: Toward increasing news consumption gaps in Europe?The International Journal of Press/Politics18(3): 281–303. DOI: 10.1177/1940161213485990.
2.
AnandNPetersonRA (2000) When market information constitutes fields: Sense making of markets in the commercial music industry. Organization Science11(3): 270–284. DOI: 10.1287/orsc.11.3.270.12502.
3.
AndersonC (2006) The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More. New York: Hyperion.
4.
AndersonC (2008) The end of theory: The data deluge makes the scientific method obsolete. Wired. Available at: https://www.wired.com/2008/06/pb-theory/(accessed 23 June 2008).
5.
BakshyEMessingSAdamicL (2015) Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science348(6239): 1130–1132.
6.
BenklerY (2006) The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven: Yale University Press.
7.
BourdieuP (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
8.
BoydDCrawfordK (2012) Critical questions for big data. Information, Communication & Society15(5): 662–679. DOI: 10.1080/1369118x.2012.678878.
9.
CavesRE (2000) Creative Industries: Contracts Between Art and Commerce. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
10.
ElberseA (2008) Should you invest in the long tail?Harvard Business Review86(7/8): 88–96.
11.
GentzkowMShapiroJM (2011) Ideological segregation online and offline. The Quarterly Journal of Economics126(4): 1799–1839. DOI: 10.1093/qje/qjr044.
12.
GiddensA (1984) The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley: University of California Press.
13.
GiddensA (1987) Social Theory and Modern Sociology. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
14.
GillmorD (2006) We the Media: Grassroots Journalism by the People, for the People. Sebastopol: O’Reilly Media.
HargittaiE (2015) Is bigger always better? Potential biases of big data derived from social network sites. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science659(1): 63–76.
17.
HartmannT (ed.) (2009) Media Choice: A Theoretical and Empirical Overview. New York: Taylor & Francis.
18.
HasebrinkUDomeyerH (2012) Media repertoires as patterns of behaviour and as meaningful practices: A multimethod approach to media use in converging media environments. Participations: Journal of Audience & Reception Studies9(2): 757–779.
19.
HindmanM (2009) The Myth of Digital Democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
20.
IyengarSHahnK (2009) Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication59(1): 19–39. DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01402.x.
21.
JamiesonKHCappellaJN (2009) Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22.
JenkinsH (2006) Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press.
23.
JenkinsHFordSGreenJ (2013) Spreadable Media: Creating Value and Meaning in a Networked Culture. New York: New York University Press.
24.
JohnsonILinYJia-Jun LiT. (2016a) Not at home on the range: Peer production and the urban/rural divide. Paper presented at Computer-Human Interaction Conference, San Jose, CA.
25.
JohnsonISenguptaSSchöningJ. (2016b) The geography and importance of localness in geotagged social media. Paper presented at Computer-Human Interaction Conference, San Jose, CA, USA, May 07–12, 2016.
26.
KatzE (1996) And deliver us from segmentation. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science546(1): 22–33.
27.
KatzEBlumlerJGGurevitchM (1974) Utilization of mass communication by the individual. In BlumlerJGKatzE (eds) The Uses of Mass Communications: Current Perspectives on Gratifications Research. Beverly Hills: Sage, pp. 19–32.
28.
KsiazekTBMalthouseECWebsterJG (2010) News-seekers and avoiders: Exploring patterns of total news consumption across media and the relationship to civic participation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media54(4): 551–568. DOI: 10.1080/08838151.2010.519808.
29.
LessigL (2008) Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy. New York: Penguin Press.
30.
LevenduskyM (2013) How Partisan Media Polarize America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
31.
MarewskiJNGalesicMGigerenzerG (2009) Fast and frugal media choices. In HartmannT (ed.) Media Choice: A Theoretical and Empirical Overview. New York: Routledge, pp. 107–128.
MertonRK (1948) The self-fulfilling prophecy. The Antioch Review8(2): 193–210. DOI: 10.2307/4609267.
37.
OwenBMWildmanSS (1992) Video Economics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
38.
PariserE (2011) The Filter Bubble: What the Internet is Hiding From You. New York: Penguin Press.
39.
PodestaJ (2014) Big Data: Seizing Opportunities Preserving Values. Washington: U.S. Government Publishing Office.
40.
PriorM (2007) Post-Broadcast Democracy: How Media Choice Increases Inequality In Political Involvement and Polarizes Elections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
41.
PriorM (2013) Media and political polarization. Annual Review of Political Science16(1): 101–127. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-100711-135242
SalganikMJDoddsPSWattsDJ (2006) Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability in an artificial cultural market. Science311(5762): 854.
44.
SchmidtECohenJ (2013) The New Digital Age: Reshaping The Future of People, Nations and Business. New York: Knopf.
45.
ShifmanL (2014) Memes in Digital Culture. Cambridge: MIT Press.
46.
SimonHA (1991) Bounded rationality and organizational learning. Organization Science2(1): 125–134.
47.
StroudNJ (2011) Niche News: The Politics of News Choice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
48.
SunsteinCR (2007) Republic.com 2.0. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
49.
ThorsonKWellsC (2016) Curated flows: A framework for mapping media exposure in the digital age. Communication Theory26(3): 309–328.
50.
TurowJ (2012) The Daily You: How the New Advertising Industry is Defining Your Identity and Your Worth. New Haven: Yale University Press.
51.
WattsDJ (2011) Everything is Obvious: How Common Sense Fails us: New York: Random House.
52.
WebsterJG (2006) Audience flow past and present: Television inheritance effects reconsidered. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media50(2): 323–337. DOI: 10.1207/s15506878jobem5002_9.
53.
WebsterJG (2010) User information regimes: How social media shape patterns of consumption. Northwestern University Law Review104(2): 593–612.
54.
WebsterJG (2011) The duality of media: A structurational theory of public attention. Communication Theory21(1): 43–66. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2010.01375.x.
55.
WebsterJG (2014) The Marketplace of Attention: How Audiences Take Shape in a Digital Age. Cambridge: MIT Press.
56.
WebsterJGKsiazekTB (2012) The dynamics of audience fragmentation: public attention in an age of digital media. Journal of Communication62(1): 39–56. DOI: doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01616.x.
57.
WebsterJGPhalenPFLicthyLW (2014) Ratings Analysis: Audience Measurement and Analytics, 4th ed. New York: Routledge.
58.
WebsterJGWakshlagJJ (1983) A theory of television program choice. Communication Research10(4): 430–446.
59.
WilliamsBADelli CarpiniMX (2011) After Broadcast News: Media Regimes, Democracy, and the New Information Environment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
60.
WuSHofmanJMMasonWA. (2011) Who says what to whom on twitter. Paper presented at the International World Wide Web Conference, March–April 2011, Hyderabad, India.
