The relationship between the online and offline self is one of the most interesting questions faced by new media researchers. This article argues that James Carey’s ritual view of communication can be of immense value in analyzing this complex phenomenon. The article revisits Carey’s famous “ritual view”—that saw mass communication and mass media as the primary ground for modern society—to elucidate how the notion of ritual can function as a theoretical category that is very useful for social and cultural analysis in the contemporary epoch. By discussing the nature of contemporary information processing, the article demonstrates how digital protocols and practices function in a highly ritualistic manner, thereby functioning as tools for the construction of individual and social reality. By applying Carey’s seminal insights to the “world” constructed by computer-mediated communication and social media, the article demonstrates how everyday digital rituals enable the modern subject to emerge in a paradoxical form—extensively networked and connected, yet deeply self-directed and solitary.
AggerB. (2012). Oversharing: Presentations of self in the Internet age. New York, NY: Routledge.
2.
AlthusserL. (1986). Ideological state apparatuses. In HanhartJ. H. (Ed.), Video culture: A critical investigation (pp. 56-95). Rochester, NY: Visual Studies Workshop Press.
3.
BaymN. (2010). Personal connections in the digital age. Malden, MA: Polity Press.
4.
BellC. (1997). Ritual: Perspectives and dimensions. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
boydd. (2010). Social networked sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In PapacharissiZ. (Ed.), A networked self: Identity, community and culture on social network sites (pp. 39-58). New York, NY: Routledge.
7.
boydd. (2012). Taken out of context: American teen sociality in networked publics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
8.
BoyleJ. (2008). The public domain: Enclosing the commons of the mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
9.
BrandeisL.WarrenS. D. (1890). The right to privacy. Harvard Law Review, 4, 193-220.
10.
BrouwerJ.MulderA. (Eds.). (2007). Interact or die!Rotterdam, The Netherlands: v2_Publishing.
11.
CareyJ. (1967). Harold Adams Innis and Marshall McLuhan. The Antioch Review, 27, 5-39.
12.
CareyJ. (1997a). Afterword: The culture in question. In MunsonE. S.WarrenC. (Eds.), James Carey: A critical reader (pp. 308-339). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
13.
CareyJ. (1997b). Political correctness and cultural studies. In MunsonE. S.WarrenC. (Eds.), James Carey: A critical reader (pp. 270-291). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
14.
CareyJ. (2002). Cultural studies and symbolic interactionism: Notes in critique and tribute to Norman Denzin. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, 25, 199-209.
15.
CareyJ. (2005). Historical pragmatism and the Internet. New Media & Society, 7, 443-455.
16.
CareyJ. (2009). Communications and culture: Essays on media and society (Revised ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
17.
CastellsM. (2009). The rise of the network society: The information age: Economy, society and culture. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
18.
ChristakiN. A.FowlerJ. H. (2011). Connected: The surprising power of our social networks and how they shape our lives. New York, NY: Back Bay Books.
19.
CohenJ. (2000). Examined lives: Informational privacy and the subject as object. Stanford Law Review, 52, 1373-1438.
20.
CouldryN. (2003). Media rituals: A critical approach. London, England: Routledge.
JonesS. (2010). The digital sublimation of the electrical sublime. In SteinerL.ChristiansC. (Eds.), Key concepts in cultural studies (pp. 199-211). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
28.
KennedyH. (2006). Beyond anonymity, or future directions for internet identity research. New Media & Society, 8, 859-876.
29.
KurzweilR. (2006). The singularity is near: When humans transcend biology. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
30.
LanierJ. (2011). You are not a gadget: A manifesto. New York, NY: Vintage.
31.
LessigL. (2006). Code 2.0. New York, NY: Basic Books.
32.
LitmanJ. (2006). Digital copyright. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
NegroponteN. (1995). Being digital. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
36.
PackerJ.RoberstonC. (Eds.). (2006). Thinking with James Carey: Essays on communications, transportation, history. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
37.
PapacharissiZ. (Ed.). (2010). A networked self: Identity, community and culture on social network sites. New York, NY: Routledge.
38.
PaulyJ. (1997). Introduction/on the origins of media studies (and media scholars). In MunsonE. S.WarrenC. (Eds.), James Carey: A critical reader (pp. 3-13). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
39.
PosterM. (2001). What’s the matter with the Internet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
40.
RainieL.WellmanB. (2012). Networked: The new social operating system. Boston, MA: The MIT Press.
41.
RobinsonL. (2007). The cyberself: The self-ing project goes online, symbolic interaction in the digital age. New Media & Society, 9, 93-110.
42.
SchrammW. (1955). Information theory and mass communication. Journalism Quarterly, 32, 131-146.
43.
ShannonC. (1949). A mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
44.
ShirkyC. (2009). Here comes everybody: How change happens when people come together. London, England: Penguin.
45.
SoloveD. (2006). The digital person: Technology and privacy in the information age. New York: New York University Press.
46.
SterneJ. (2006). Transportation and communication: Together as you’ve always wanted them. In PackerJ.RobertsonC. (Eds.), Thinking with James Carey: Essays on communications, transportation, history (pp. 117-135). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
47.
TerranovaT. (2004). Network culture: Politics for the information age. London, England: Pluto Press.
48.
TurkleS. (1996). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. London, England: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
49.
TurkleS. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. New York, NY: Basic Books.
50.
TurnerV. (1962). Chihamba the white spirit: A ritual drama of the Ndembu (The Rhodes Livingstone Papers, No. 33). Manchester, UK: University of Manchester Press.
51.
TurowJ. (2011). The daily you: How the new advertising industry is defining your identity and your worth. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
52.
TwengeJ.CampbellK. W. (2013). The narcissism epidemic: Living in the age of entitlement. New York, NY: Free Press.
