The Frontiers of Society, Science and Technology, 2022, 4(12); doi: 10.25236/FSST.2022.041215.
Broadcasting Research Office, Guangzhou Sport University, the Guangzhou Avenue, Guangzhou, China
In the age of social media, the generation and use of data are at the heart of how media operates. The media sector is a popular area for capital investment. In the process, commercial use of data has become more frequent. At the same time, the values of individual users collectively shape the media value system, and the importance of media platforms in turn influences individual behavior and values. This paper discusses the impact of commercial and personal use of data on contemporary values through the commercial use of data, the management of quantitative values, and changes in social values.
Media platforms, Personal data, Commercialisation
Zhongwang Lv. How does the commercial and personal use of data influence and shape notions of value and worth?. The Frontiers of Society, Science and Technology (2022) Vol. 4, Issue 12: 98-102. https://doi.org/10.25236/FSST.2022.041215.
 Smythe, D., 1994. Communications: Blindspot of Western Marxism . Smythe, Counterclockwise: Perspectives on Communication, pp. 266-91.
 Toffler, A. and Alvin, T., 1980. The third wave (Vol. 484). New York: Bantam books.
 Wittel, A., 2015. Digital marx: Toward a political economy of distributed media. Marx in the Age of Digital Capitalism, 68, pp. 1-22.
 Terranova, T., 2004. Network culture: Politics for the information age. Pluto Press, pp. 73–4.
 Manzerolle.V., 2010. Mobilizing the audience commodity: Digital labour in a wireless world. Ephemera: Theoryamp;politics in organization, pp. 455.
 Scholz, T.,2008. Market Ideology and the Myths of Web 2.0. First Monday, 13(3).
 Obar, J.A., Zube, P. and Lampe, C., 2012. Advocacy 2.0: An analysis of how advocacy groups in the United States perceive and use social media as tools for facilitating civic engagement and collective action. Journal of information policy, 2, pp.1-25.
 Maragh, R.S., 2016. “Our Struggles Are Unequal” Black Women’s Affective Labor between Television and Twitter. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 40(4), pp.351-369.
 Cornelissen, G., Karelaia, N. and Soyer, E., 2013. Clicktivism or Slacktivism? Impression Management and Moral Licensing. ACR European Advances.
 Vie, S., 2014. In defense of “slacktivism”: The Human Rights Campaign Facebook logo as digital activism. First Monday, 19(4).
 Biddle, S., 2015. Twitter doesn’t make you Martin Luther King[EB /OL]. https: // gizmodo. com/ twitter -doesnt-make-you-martin-luther-king-5876512.
 Svensson, J., 2011. The expressive turn of citizenship in digital late modernity. JeDEM-e Journal of eDemocracy and Open Government, 3(1), pp. 42-56.
 Diakopoulos, N., 2019. Automating the news: How algorithms are rewriting the media. Harvard University Press.
 Bucher, T., 2012. Want to be on the top? Algorithmic power and the threat of invisibility on Facebook. New media & society, 14(7), pp.1164-1180.
 Tailor, K., 2015. The patient revolution: How big data and analytics are transforming the health care experience. John Wiley & Sons.
 Neff, G. and Nafus, D., 2016. Self-tracking. MIT Press.
 Arvidsson, A., 2009. The ethical economy: Towards a post-capitalist theory of value, Capital & Class, 33(1), pp. 13-29.
 Arvidsson, A., & Colleoni, E., 2012. Value in Informational Capitalism and on the Internet. The Information Society, 28(3), pp. 135-150.
 Cheal, D., 2015. The gift economy. Routledge.
 Jenkins, H., 2006. Fans, bloggers, and gamers: Exploring participatory culture. nyu Press.
 Kennedy, H. and Hill, R.L., 2018. The feeling of numbers: Emotions in everyday engagements with data and their visualisation. Sociology, 52(4), pp.830-848.
 Zhang, L. and Fung, A. Y., 2014. Working as playing? Consumer labor, guild and the secondary industry of online gaming in China. New Media & Society, 16(1), pp. 38-54.
 Fuchs, C., 2012. Dallas Smythe Today-The Audience Commodity, the Digital Labour Debate, Marxist Political Economy and Critical Theory. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society, 10(2), pp.692-740.