Smartphones and the Relationship Between Representation and Power
The relationship between representation and power is dynamic and everchanging; with recent developments in technology and the introduction of ubiquitous digital media such as smart phones and social media, their connection has shifted dramatically. In order to portray their own narrative, the disadvantaged students of UC Davis rebelled against the ‘almighty’ power of their institution, clearly illustrating this altered relationship. By using this notion as a focal point, this essay will argue that the shift between representation and power is a direct result of the development of innovative and accessible technology. Through an analysis of the gross injustices of the UC Davis pepper-spray incident in terms of cultural texts, story portrayal, the violation of basic rights and the public’s response, it becomes evident that the transition to a culture of increased participation has fundamentally transformed the relationship between representation and power.
On the 18th of November 2011, seated and relatively docile Occupy Movement student protestors were doused with military-grade pepper spray at point blank range by UC Davis police. After requesting for the demonstrators to move on numerous times, Lieutenant John Pike resorted to this extreme display of force in a brash attempt to urge students to cooperate. Footage of the incident was captured on bystanders’ phone cameras and uploaded online across multiple media sites, spreading across the world as a viral video. Both students and UC Davis rushed to seize hold of the hegemonic portrayal and establish their narrative as the dominant representation. Society was presented with two alternate interpretations; UC Davis’ actions were necessary and justified, versus the gross violation of students’ rights and misuse of power. By depicting their message as the true and authentic sequence of events, the successful stakeholder would instantaneously gain power over their rival. Thus, a clear hegemonic struggle was established, with the students’ perspective as the aggrieved population resisting UC Davis’ abuse of institutionalised power and the meaning-making process gaining traction across broader society. Described as, “…leadership or predominant influence exercised by one particular group… in relation to others”, this struggle for hegemony involves a combination of both coercion and consent (Smucker, 2012, p.4). By presenting their narrative as authentic and true, students of UC Davis seized this dominant portrayal, thus demonstrating the shift between representation and power.
The emergence of a networked society with a culture of increased participation challenged institutions’ monopolisation of the meaning-making process. Audiences were once presented with a single perspective, one they were forced to accept due to their utter lack of power to influence this process. Institutions had this ability to manipulate narratives by exerting control over the representation of key communication moments and carefully selecting what meanings to distribute. However, due to media platforms’ potential to manage public interpretation of messages and promote user-generated content, the traditional model of communication composed of a communicator, message and receiver has become incredibly complex. Whilst this non-linear process results in an interpretive struggle, the development of ‘ubiquitous digital media’ immerses receivers directly into the meaning-making process. Once limited to footage captured by an institutionally funded camera crew, the distribution of media across social platforms by the general public boycotts the possibility of a one-sided narrative emerging. Students’ use of smartphones to capture and share content in the aftermath of the pepper-spray incident made it impossible for UC Davis to simply gloss over the matter. The students were thus given an avenue to voice their injustices and, “…make, remake and circulate meaning” (Carah & Louw 2015, p. 14). Furthermore, the shift to a more networked and participatory society, as demonstrated by the aggrieved students of UC Davis, has fundamentally altered the relationship between representation and power.
With money invested in the communications industry, UC Davis’ access to resources such as media, public relation firms and police should have superficially worked to their advantage. However, their reliance on financial assets failed to enable the university to obtain the hegemonic portrayal — in the eyes of the general public, their actions were brash and unjustified. On the other hand, armed with smartphones and access to social media, student bystanders overthrew UC Davis’ abuse of power. Despite lacking economic backing, their understanding of cultural texts and contemporary media was key to gaining hegemony. Reaping in over 2.6 million views on YouTube, Aggie Studio’s ‘UC Davis Protestors Pepper Sprayed’ video captures the incident in a raw and unfiltered way. The shocking recording is clearly authentic, contrasting starkly against the meticulously packaged mainstream media coverage perceived as sterile by the public. The shaky footage, punctuated by cries of horror and outrage, is disturbing to watch — clearly painting Lieutenant Pike in a negative light. American citizens’ right to free speech and assembly, as constituted by the First Amendment, is clearly violated in the footage. Thus, with, “liberalism (and) democracy,” regarded as, “dominant hegemonic ideas” this gross contradiction of patriarchy outraged audiences worldwide (Carah & Louw, 2015, p. 16). Therefore, the distressing YouTube video featuring student-captured footage demonstrates the exigence of smartphones in the shifting relationship between representation and power.
Upon filming and uploading footage to social media, the ordeal was instantly classified as a cultural text. As a social practice through which worldly understandings are reached and underlying meanings are revealed, cultural texts are pivotal to gaining insight into a range of relationships. Composed of signs, signifiers and mechanisms, these elements work together to provide a degree of, “…flexibility in meaning to different people” at a cultural level, in the form of connotative and denotative understandings (Carah & Peak, 2017). The former refers to the widely-accepted meanings and associations between signs and everyday objects, whilst the latter involves close connections between signs and more ‘natural’ associations, such as an objective truths. In the case of the pepper-spray incident, the smartphone-captured video was instantaneously granted with denotations of injustice and the misuse of power. This perception is widely attributed to the negative connotations of the police officer’s dark attire, unbothered stance and imposing figure, which contrasts dramatically against students’ colourful clothing and cowering demeanours — thus evoking a wider range of emotions such as outrage and disgust from audiences. Overall, this unwarranted display of brutality is a clear negative signifier, reinforcing this hegemonic depiction and thus the modified relationship between representation and power.
In order to establish a tangible connection with the general public, the portrayal of an authentic narrative is essential. Both stakeholders in the pepper-spray incident sought to achieve a dominant decoding of their respective messages. UC Davis students’ footage proved to tell a convincing, yet equally horrifying tale of innocent demonstrators terrorised by a menacing police officer. This nod to the trope of a threatening villain and courageous hero draws a parallel to the hegemonic idea of an antagonist versus protagonist. Therefore, this narrative proved to be highly appealing — the establishment of a clear villain breaching the rights of the innocent, and hero rebelling against their suppression aligns with audience’s democratic values. On the other hand, UC Davis’ attempt to steer this narrative to reflect their own desires varied significantly. Opting for the controlled environment of a press conference, in which the various attendees were purposefully selected, the institution rushed to maintain a degree of authority over the incident. UC Davis practiced absolute control over both television-interview questions and Chancellor Linda Katehi’s response in a desperate attempt to reassure the public they were undergoing appropriate action. Urging the community to, “…work together,” Katehi pleads, “…our university has to be better than it is” (Ganga & Gordon, 2011). Widely regarded as transparent, the Chancellor’s response evoked strong feelings of a lack of credibility due to her active role in the incident.
However, society at large found UC Davis’ approach hard to swallow due to the sterility and seemingly ingenuity of their response. Thus, the notion that intended interpretations of communication are not always received by audiences is supported. By assigning their own personal meanings to messages, receivers’ interpretation of communication often fails to align with its creator’s original intentions. Additionally, the public’s perception of the incident demonstrates how the dynamic process of meaning-making has its own determinants and conditions of existence. This serves as a direct link to Stuart Hall’s encoding and decoding model of communication — the translation and extraction of a message’s meaning by a receiver. Overall, the undermining of the public’s democratic ideologies by UC Davis’ narrative made headway for the hegemonic portrayal of police brutality, institutionalised power, and injustice.
The UC Davis pepper-spray incident illustrates the clear shift in hegemonic struggle due to the development of modern modes of communication. The emergence of a culture promoting participation has weakened institutions’ power to shape and manipulate the public’s views. Through the power granted by their smartphones, UC Davis student demonstrators were enabled to participate in the coveted meaning-making process. Through analysis of cultural texts, story portrayal, the violation of basic rights, and the public’s response, this essay has presented the argument that the relationship between representation and power has fundamentally shifted. With the unjustified actions of UC Davis police contrasting against the public’s democratic ideologies, a damning portrayal of the institution has been presented by social media worldwide — once that will define the university indefinitely.
References
Carah, N. & Louw, P. (2015) Media and society. 14–16. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Carah, N. & Peak, M. (2017) Cultural texts. Media Machines. Accessed via http://mediamachines.org/log/2017/3/2/cultural-texts
Ganga, Maria & Gordon, Larry. (2011). UC Davis chancellor apologizes for pepper-spray incident. Los Angeles Times. Accessed via https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2011-nov-21-la-me-1122-ucdavis-protest-20111122-story.html
Smucker, Mathew. (2012) What is hegemonic struggle? Journal of Media, 3(2), 12–14.
