{"id":1393,"date":"2009-06-26T04:54:21","date_gmt":"2009-06-26T09:54:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/thickculture\/?p=1393"},"modified":"2009-06-26T06:04:17","modified_gmt":"2009-06-26T11:04:17","slug":"reconfiguring-the-political-economy-the-moral-economy-in-facebook","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/thickculture\/2009\/06\/26\/reconfiguring-the-political-economy-the-moral-economy-in-facebook\/","title":{"rendered":"Reconfiguring the Political Economy & the Moral Economy on Facebook"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Rationality<\/a>
Rationality & Emotionality ~The Economist by Otto<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Crosspost:: A shorter version is available on <\/em>Rhizomicomm<\/em><\/a><\/strong>. <\/em><\/p>\n

When I was a senior in college, I must admit thought quite highly of economics and its rationality. \u00a0It was the early 1990s and I was contemplating law school and doctoral programs in environmental economics, with interests in\u00a0law and economics<\/a><\/strong> and public choice<\/a>. \u00a0I was given <\/span>The Gift Economy<\/a> by <\/span>David Cheal<\/a> to read, altering my worldview forever. \u00a0A close second was <\/span>Jean Baudrillard’s Selected Writings<\/a>, but that’s another post.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Cheal’s book focuses on the tensions between market relationships {political economy} and social ones {moral economy}, as a distinctive characteristic of the social milieu in capitalist societies. \u00a0While gifts may be given for instrumentalist means, they often are not, hence being representative of a wide array of behaviors firmly in the realm of the symbolic and the relational. \u00a0Cheal talks about the interplay between the market and social realms, which could easily be superimposed on a Pierre Bourdieu<\/a><\/strong> framework of fields<\/a><\/strong>, habitus<\/a><\/strong>, doxa<\/a><\/strong>, and forms of capital<\/a><\/strong>. \u00a0In the past, gift-giving was often marginalized and thought to be subsumed in a capitalist exchange model. \u00a0Recent thinking considers gifts to be a social process, one that has a significant economic impact.<\/p>\n

So, how is this interplay affected by social media? \u00a0In my current work, I’ve been thinking of the use of Facebook by organizations, particularly in the realm of philanthropy. \u00a0Organizations have been embracing the idea of creating relationships with constituents, rather than focusing on transactions. \u00a0Health non-profits often provide information and advocate on behalf of their constituents. \u00a0By doing so, this creates a person-organization relationship and ideally leads to greater levels of philanthropy {economic resources for the non-profit}. \u00a0The key is that the relationship must have salient meanings for the constituents, i.e.<\/em>, the brand meaning system. \u00a0Depending on the context, this is often tied to outcomes, e.g.<\/em>, cures for diseases, social change, identity, etc<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Social media and social networking sites like Facebook not only foster person-organizational relationships via information disemmination and services, but also peer-to-peer relationships. \u00a0These relationships are social, but are within a capitalist market context. \u00a0Hence, we return to the gift. \u00a0We manage relationships through gift-giving and other behaviours, through the management of symbols::<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\"Facebook<\/a><\/dt>\n
Facebook gifts:: Sentiment for a $1<\/div>\n<\/dl>\n<\/div>\n

Social media has the ability to move constituents from this model::<\/p>\n

Organizational Activities -> Org.-Person Relationship -> Outcomes<\/p>\n

more towards this one::<\/p>\n

Organizational Activities\u00a0\u00a0-> Communities of practice -> Outcomes<\/p>\n

The latter being facilitated by the Internet and with the possibility of a richer set of outcomes stemming from an engaged community. \u00a0We want gifts to be expressive of our relational ties, hence full of meanings, within a given social context, e.g<\/em>., a community of practice.<\/p>\n

Facebook is a global player<\/a><\/strong>, but still needs a solid revenue model<\/a><\/strong>. \u00a0Apple’s success with “apps” show the power of a platform to deliver value, often at a low price-point. \u00a0The Facebook platform should be developed in line with how people, how a large number of <\/em>people, actually engage in symbolic relationship management, tied to other strategies, such as::<\/p>\n