Author(s):

  • Hepp, Andreas
  • Alpen, Susan
  • Simon, Piet

Abstract:

This article presents the results of a discourse analysis of press coverage on the Quantified Self (QS) movement in the German and British (online) press between 2007 and 2018. The analysis is driven by two questions: What discursive patterns can be discerned within this coverage? And, what characterizes the translation of the experimental practices and imaginaries of this pioneer community into an overall societal reflection of deep mediatization? In essence, the article shows that the QS movement becomes a ‘general signifier’ for a dystopian view of deep mediatization. So, while the QS movement itself understands its practices and community as self-empowering, self-reasoning, and experimental, the constructions of the QS movement in public discourse suggest the opposite. Paradoxically, however, another basic imaginary of the pioneer community is adopted and confirmed, namely that of the (simple) mutability of society as a consequence of digital media technologies.

Documentation:

https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2019-0189

References:
  1. Abend, P., & Fuchs, M. (Eds.) (2016). Quantified selves and statistical bodies. Bielefeld: transcript. Search in Google Scholar
  2. Ajana, B. (2017). Digital health and the biopolitics of the Quantified Self. Digital Health, 3(1), 1–18. Search in Google Scholar
  3. Barbrook, R., & Cameron, A. (1996). The Californian ideology. Science as Culture, 6(1), 44–72. Search in Google Scholar
  4. Bennett, T. (1982). Text and social process. Screen Education, 41, 3–15. Search in Google Scholar
  5. Berker, T., Hartmann, M., Punie, Y., & Ward, K. (Eds.) (2006). Domestication of media and technology. London: Open University Press. Search in Google Scholar
  6. Bijker, W. E., & Law, J. (Eds.) (1992). Shaping technology – building society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Search in Google Scholar
  7. Boesel, W. E. (2013). What is the Quantified Self now? Retrieved June, 24th 2015 from http://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2013/05/22/what-is-the-quantified-self-now/#more-15717. Search in Google Scholar
  8. Bourdieu, P. (2010). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste (1st ed.). London, New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
  9. Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translation. In J. Law (Ed.), Power, action and belief (pp. 196–223). Search in Google Scholar
  10. Choe, E. K., Lee, N. B., Lee, B., & Pratt, W. (2014). Understanding quantified-selfers’ practices in collecting and exploring personal data. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Metro Toronto Convention Centre, Toronto, Canada, 26 April-1 May. Search in Google Scholar
  11. Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2017). The mediated construction of reality. Cambridge: Polity Press. Search in Google Scholar
  12. Crawford, K., Lingel, J., & Karppi, T. (2015). Our metrics, ourselves. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 18(4–5), 479–496. Search in Google Scholar
  13. Didžiokaitė, G., Saukko, P., & Greiffenhagen, C. (2018). The mundane experience of everyday calorie trackers. New Media & Society, 20(4), 1470–1487. Search in Google Scholar
  14. Dolata, U., & Schrape, J.-F. (2018). Collectivity and power on the internet. Wiesbaden: Springer. Search in Google Scholar
  15. Fawcett, T. (2015). Mining the Quantified Self. Big Data, 3(4), 249–266. Search in Google Scholar
  16. Fiore-Gartland, B., & Neff, G. (2015). Communication, mediation, and the expectations of data. International Journal of Communication, 9, 19. Search in Google Scholar
  17. Fotopoulou, A. (2018). From networked to quantified self. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), A networked self: Platforms, stories, connections (pp. 144–159). New York, London: Routledge. Search in Google Scholar
  18. Gerhard, U., & Hepp, A. (2018). Appropriating digital traces of self-quantification: Contextualising ‘pragmatic’ and ‘enthusiast’ self-trackers. International Journal of Communication, 11, 683–700. Search in Google Scholar
  19. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1999). Discovery of grounded theory. New Brunswick: Aldine Transaction. Search in Google Scholar
  20. Greenfield, D. (2016). Deep data. In D. Nafus (Ed.), Quantified (pp. 123–146). Cambridge, London: MIT Press. Search in Google Scholar
  21. Hepp, A. (2016). ‘Pioneer communities: Collective actors of deep mediatisation’, Media, Culture & Society, 38 (6), 918–33. Search in Google Scholar
  22. Hepp, A. (2018). ‘What Makes a Maker? – Curating a pioneer community through franchising’. Nordisk Tidsskrift for Informationsvidenskab Og Kulturformidling, 7 (2), 3–18. Search in Google Scholar
  23. Hepp, A. (2020a). Deep mediatization. London: Routledge. Search in Google Scholar
  24. Hepp, A. (2020b). ‘The fragility of curating a pioneer community: Deep mediatization and the spread of the quantified self and maker movements’. International Journal of Cultural Studies, Online First. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1367877920922867. Search in Google Scholar
  25. Hitzler, R., & Niederbacher, A. (2010). Leben in Szenen [Life in scenes]. Wiesbaden: VS. Search in Google Scholar
  26. Humphreys, L. (2018). The qualified self. Camebridge, MA: MIT Press. Search in Google Scholar
  27. Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S.-H. (Eds.) (2015). Dreamscapes of modernity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Search in Google Scholar
  28. Keller, R. (2013). Doing discourse research. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage. Search in Google Scholar
  29. Kelly, K. (2016). The inevitable. New York: Viking. Search in Google Scholar
  30. Lupton, D. (2014). Self-tracking cultures. Retrieved April 26th 2016 from http://www.canberra.edu.au/researchrepository/file/89265416-5c81-4d4c-bed3-948c2d9a0734/1/full_text_postprint.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
  31. Lupton, D. (2016). The quantified self. Cambridge: Polity Press. Search in Google Scholar
  32. Nafus, D. (Ed.) (2016). Quantified. Cambridge, London: MIT Press. Search in Google Scholar
  33. Neff, G., & Nafus, D. (2016). Self-tracking. Massachusetts: MIT Press. Search in Google Scholar
  34. O’Hara, K., Tuffield, M. M., & Shadbolt, N. (2008). Lifelogging. IDIS, 1(1), 155–172. Search in Google Scholar
  35. Pink, S., & Fors, V. (2017). Self-tracking and the mind–body–environment. Cultural Geographies, 24(3), 375–388.Search in Google Scholar
  36. Ruckenstein, M., & Pantzar, M. (2017). Beyond the Quantified Self. New Media & Society, 19(3), 401–418. Search in Google Scholar
  37. Scott, S. V., & Orlikowski, W. J. (2014). Entanglements in practice. MIS Quarterly, 38(3), 873–893. Search in Google Scholar
  38. Selke, S. (Ed.) (2016). Lifelogging. Wiesbaden: Springer. Search in Google Scholar
  39. Sharon, T. (2017). Self-tracking for health and the quantified self. Philos Technol, 30, 93–121. Search in Google Scholar
  40. Sharon, T., & Zandbergen, D. (2016). From data fetishism to quantifying selves. New Media & Society, 19(11), 1695–1709. Search in Google Scholar
  41. Strübing, J., Passoth, J.-H., Gugutzer, R., & Duttweiler, S. (Eds.) (2016). Leben nach Zahlen. Bielefeld: transcript.Search in Google Scholar
  42. Turner, F. (2006). From counterculture to cyberculture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Search in Google Scholar
The SELF Institute