Production of Post-Truth Consciousness Through Cyber Space: Public space of the Netizen

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 22 Sayı: 1, 293 - 303, 20.06.2021

Evren Ülkeryıldız , Nilay Özcan Uslu

https://doi.org/10.17494/ogusbd.952839

Cited By: 2

Öz

In this study it is hypothesized that cyberspace is an artificial virtual reality; which is simulated as time - knowledge - hyper-reality dimensions. It is also argued that the experience of existence in cyberspace is realized with consciousness rather than the body, but that consciousness is produced as an interactive digital habitat consisting of post-truth norms which has lost its references as a critical filter of public debate and rational reasoning. Cyber-space can be analyzed according to its public nature. In that sense; cyber-space is discussed with proposed model: (1) the representation object (knowledge), (2) representation tool (screen), (3) the subject of representation; netizen (identity plane) dimensions. As a result, it is possible to argue that cyber-space is based on a cyclical production praxis, where the objective realities created with post-truth consciousness are justified by substituting subjective realities through continuous sharing.

Anahtar Kelimeler

cyber-space, post-thruth, netizen, hyper-reality, simulacrum

Hakikat Sonrası Bilincin Siber-Mekân Üzerinden Üretimi: Ağdaşın Kamusal Mekânı

Öz

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı siber-mekânda var olma deneyiminin gerçekleştirildiği bilincin hangi kuramsal değer sistemleri neticesinde oluşturulduğunu sorgulamaktır. Bu noktada çalışma, kamusal mekânın temel öznesi olan vatandaşın siber-mekândaki karşılığı olarak ağdaşa dönüştüğü varsayımı üzerine kuruludur. Benzer yaklaşımla ağdaşın bilincini şekillendiren, aşırı-gerçeklik boyutunun yarattığı kimlik ve simulakrum değer düzlemlerinin nasıl oluştuğu bu araştırma kapsamında betimsel analiz yöntemiyle sorgulanmaktadır. Araştırmanın temel soruları; siber-mekânda ağdaşın toplumsal kanaatlerinin hangi kuramsal düzlemlerden geçerek oluşturulduğu ve bu süreçte rasyonel aklın eleştirel filtresinin yerini ne tür bir gerçekliğin aldığıdır. Bu bağlamda araştırmada yöntem olarak siber-mekânın yapısını tanımlamak üzere; zaman – bilgi – aşırı-gerçeklik boyutları barındırdığına dair hipotetik bir model önerilmektedir. Önerilen modelde siber-mekânın kamusallığına dair bulgular betimsel analiz yöntemiyle tartışılmaktadır. Öte yandan önerilen modelin kamusallığı betimleme kapsamı; (1) temsil nesnesi (bilgi), (2) temsil aracı (ekran düzlemi), (3) temsil öznesi; ağdaş (kimlik düzlemi) perspektiflerinden incelenmektedir. Araştırma neticesinde siber-mekânın hakikat-sonrası bilinç ile oluşturulmuş nesnel gerçekliklerin öznel gerçekliklerle yer değiştirilerek sürekli paylaşım yoluyla meşrulaştırıldığı, döngüsel bir üretim praksisine dayandığı sonucuna ulaşılmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

sibermekan, hakikat-sonrası, ağdaş, simulakrum, aşırı-gerçeklik

Kaynakça

• Anders, P. (2001). Anthropic cyberspace: defining electronic space from first principles. Leonardo, 34(5), 409-416.
• Atay, T. (2017). Görünüyorum o halde varım–meşrutiyet çağı’nda kültür ve insan: İstanbul: Can Yayınları.
• Barlas, M. A., ve Çalışkan, O. (2006). Virtual space as a public sphere: rethinking the political and professional agenda of spatial planning and design. METU JFA, 23(2), 1-20.
• Baudrillard, J. (1994a). L'illusion de la fin: Stanford University Press.
• Baudrillard, J. (1994b). Simulacra and simulation: University of Michigan Press.
• Baudrillard, J. (2000). The vital illusion: Columbia University Press.
• Baudrillard, J. (2016). The consumer society: Myths and structures: Sage.
• Baudrillard, J., ve Maclean, M. (1985). The masses: The implosion of the social in the media. New Literary History, 16(3), 577-589.
• Benedikt, M. (1991). Introduction to cyberspace: First steps. Cyberspace: First Steps, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
• Boyd, D. (2007). Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning (ss. 119-142). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
• Burkell, J., Fortier, A., Wong, L. Y. C., ve Simpson, J. L. (2014). Facebook: Public space, or private space? Information, Communication & Society, 17(8), 974-985.
• Burrows, R. (1997). Cyberpunk as social theory: William Gibson and the sociological imagination. Imagining Cities: Scripts, Signs. Memory. London, UK: Rouiledge, 235-248.
• Chandrasekera, T. (2006). Liquid architecture: hypersurface as an architectural idiom. University of Moratuwa, Siri Lanka.
• Dahlberg, L. (2001). Computer-mediated communication and the public sphere: A critical analysis. Journal of Computer-mediated communication, 7(1), JCMC714.
• Gibson, W. (1984). Neuromancer. New York Ace Books.
• Habermas, J. (2010). The public sphere: an encyclopedia article (1964). The idea of the public sphere: A reader, 114-120.
• Hauben, M., ve Hauben, R. (1997). Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet: Wiley-IEEE Computer Society.
• Heim, M. (1994). The metaphysics of virtual reality: Oxford University Press.
• Humphreys, L. (2010). Mobile social networks and urban public space. New Media & Society, 12(5), 763-778.
• Humphreys, L., ve Liao, T. (2013). Foursquare and the parochialization of public space. First Monday, 18(11), 1-4.
• Jones, S. G. (1997). The Internet and its social landscape. Virtual culture: Identity and communication in cybersociety, 7-35.
• Kaçmaz, G. (2004). Architectural Space in the Digital Age: Cyberspace, Hyperspace and Exospace Through Science Fiction Films. Istanbul Technical University.
• Kennedy, H. (2006). Beyond anonymity, or future directions for internet identity research. New media & society, 8(6), 859-876.
• Kia, A. (2017). Analysis of the Liquid Architecture Ideology Based on Marcos Novak’s Theories. International Journal of Architecture and Urban Development, 7(4), 63-72.
• Koch, A. (2005). Cyber citizen or cyborg citizen: Baudrillard, political agency, and the commons in virtual politics. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 20(2-3), 159-175.
• Kurbak, E. (2002). Fiziksel Dünyanın Simülasyonu, Düşsel Bir Coğrafya Ya Da Yeni Bir Gerçeklik Olarak Siberuzay. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi.
• Leach, N. (2005). Rethinking architecture: a reader in cultural theory: Routledge.
• Lofland, L. H. (2017). The public realm: Exploring the city's quintessential social territory: Routledge.
• Long, G. P. (1993). Who Are You: Identity and Anonymity in Cyberspace. University of Pittsburgh Law Review, 55, 1177-1212.
• McCombs, M. E., ve Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public opinion quarterly, 36(2), 176-187.
• McIntyre, L. (2018). Post-truth: MIT Press.
• Naseh, M. V. (2016). Person and Personality in Cyber Space: A Legal Analysis of Virtual Identity. Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology, 10(1), 1-21.
• Novak, M. (1991). Liquid architectures in cyberspace Cyberspace: first steps (ss. 272-285).
• Novak, M. (1996). Transmitting architecture: The transphysical city. CTheory, (76), 11-29
• Özbek, M. (2004). Kamusal Alanın Sınırları. M. Özbek (Ed.), Kamusal Alan (ss. 19-91). İstanbul: Hil.
• Özener, O. Ö. (2003). Siberuzay Dokusu Ve Hipermetin Mekan İçin Etkileşimli Bir Ortam Modeli. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi.
• Papacharissi, Z. (2002). The virtual sphere: The internet as a public sphere. New media & society, 4(1), 9-27.
• Platon. (2016). Devlet (Sabahattin Eyüboğlu-M. Ali Cimcöz, Çev.). İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları.
• Poster, M. (1997). Cyberdemocracy: Internet and the public sphere. Internet culture, 201-218.
• Ritzer, G. (2010). Enchanting a disenchanted world: Continuity and change in the cathedrals of consumption: Pine Forge Press.
• Ritzer, G., ve Jurgenson, N. (2010). Production, consumption, prosumption: The nature of capitalism in the age of the digital ‘prosumer’. Journal of consumer culture, 10(1), 13-36.
• Sampaio, A., ve Aragon, J. (1997). To Boldly Go (Where No Man Has Gone Before): Women and Politics in Cyberspace. New Political Science No.40, 145-167.
• Shaw, D. B. (2015). Streets for cyborgs: The electronic flâneur and the posthuman city. Space and Culture, 18(3), 230-242.
• Shenk, D. (1997). Data smog: Surviving the information glut: Harper Collins Publishers.
• Silva, C. A. (2005). Liquid architectures: Marcos Novak's territory of information. Louisiana State University.
• Simpson, B. (2005). Identity manipulation in cyberspace as a leisure option: Play and the exploration of self. Information & Communications Technology Law, 14(2), 115-131.
• Sobchack, V. (2005). Postfuturism. In S. Redmond (Ed.), Liquid metal: the science fiction film reader (ss. 220-227). New York: Columbia University Press. Toulouse, C., ve Luke, T. W. (2013). The politics of cyberspace: Routledge.