Abstract
This article investigates into the domestication of communication technology through two cultural discourses, for one that of interior magazines and for two that of technology magazines. During domestication process technological items are objectified by ways in which they are brought to a physical environment and in ways in which they rearrange that environment (cf. Silverstone & al. 1992). The study is inspired by the domestication approach (Silverstone & Hirsch 1992, Silverstone 1994), while its methodological background is mainly based on critical discourse analysis (Fairclough 1995). The data consist of 55 magazine articles including 687 images. The findings indicate that the discourses differ significantly. Thus, home technologies and homes as physical spaces live each on another planet in print media. The differentiation reveals an understanding of communication technologies as non- design. Both types of magazines ignore the issue of making communication technology home at home, an issue addressed to designerly thinking.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21606/nordes.2005.057
Citation
Routarinne, S.(2005) Domestication and context: Studying objectification in print media, in Binder, T., Redström, J. (eds.), Nordes 2005: In the making, 29-31 May, Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, Copenhagen, Denmark. https://doi.org/10.21606/nordes.2005.057
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Domestication and context: Studying objectification in print media
This article investigates into the domestication of communication technology through two cultural discourses, for one that of interior magazines and for two that of technology magazines. During domestication process technological items are objectified by ways in which they are brought to a physical environment and in ways in which they rearrange that environment (cf. Silverstone & al. 1992). The study is inspired by the domestication approach (Silverstone & Hirsch 1992, Silverstone 1994), while its methodological background is mainly based on critical discourse analysis (Fairclough 1995). The data consist of 55 magazine articles including 687 images. The findings indicate that the discourses differ significantly. Thus, home technologies and homes as physical spaces live each on another planet in print media. The differentiation reveals an understanding of communication technologies as non- design. Both types of magazines ignore the issue of making communication technology home at home, an issue addressed to designerly thinking.