Deuze, Liquid Life and Media Work

Mark Deuze's book Media Work has been the focus of furor in the field since publication in October 2007. Deuze has been speaking to standing-room-only audiences across Europe and the first printing of the book was sold out in 6 weeks, which is exceeding unusual for an academic title; check Deuze's blog for details. The book and the author seem to have touched a sensitive chord, particularly among journalists and media students, and merits, if for no other reason, careful consideration.

In this posting I note a few 'first impressions' of the book and signal what I consider its Achilles Heel. To begin, Deuze grounds the work on a notion he borrows and elaborates from Zygmunt Bauman, liquid modernity, which Deuze rephrases as 'liquid life', described as "the increasingly fluid and unstable character of everyday lived experience" (2007: xi). Although this notion has an appealing ring, it would be erroneous to assume any particular newness or recency to the idea: it was the Greek philosopher Heraclitus who, several hundred years B.C., suggested that all was in flux, in some form of constant movement and change, which seems strikingly similar to Deuze's formulation of liquid life. Deuze does not provide further historical elaboration of the term, resting instead on Bauman's thesis stemming from a work published in 2000. There is also no critical contest of the concept; instead, it is presented as the theoretical light for understanding contemporary media developments. This perspective may be valuable, but I would have preferred more elaboration and, especially, critical distance during its presentation.

The aim of the book is to "deconstruct what media work means in the four key media professions: advertising…, journalism, film and television production, and computer and video game development" (p. xii). Interestingly, other 'key' media professions are passed over: radio, the music industry, print publishing (magazines, books), media delivery industries like cable and satellite. I have no difficulty with selection from a wide array of candidate professions, but I would have welcomed clarification as to the reasons for this selection of four, which are in themselves heterogeneous conglomerates of media.

Immediately after announcing this focus Deuze indicates that "interviews were conducted by students in my classes, and in the classes of my colleagues and friends" (p. xii) in the following five countries: The Netherlands, Finland, New Zealand, South Africa. This is as close as Deuze comes to suggesting the sources of information for the task established, deconstructing what media work means; no research questions are formulated, no interview instruments (e.g., questionnaires, protocols) are included, no schema for analysis of the interviews is evident, and, most telling, no extracts from the interviews are integrated into the text – at least in an identifiable manner.

It is very difficult to discern, in other words, how information from the interviews informed the presentation in the central chapters devoted to the four media professions: advertising, journalism, film / television production, and computer /video games. Instead, throughout these and the other chapters in the book a wide range of literature is presented and discussed, providing what might be considered an extended review of the literature but without leading toward or informing an empirical study of the four professions and without exploring how these professions might differ along dimensions or between cultural settings. In these respects, the presentation is disappointing; there is a lack of differentiation and lack of comparison, there is limited concern with historical transformations in the four clusters of media professions.

Perhaps most disappointing from a research perspective, and what I consider the Achilles Heel of the book, is the lack of discussion about and suggestions for further empirical study. The conclusion chapter comes to a halt after enumeration of ten concepts based on Deuze's point of departure, suggesting that "a structural sense of constant change and permanent revolution is the strongest guide or predictor of the human condition in the digital age" (pp. 234-235). That starting point merits, it seems to me, empirical exploration rather than unquestioned acceptance. Through formulation and systematic exploration of a research agenda related to this point and the ten related concepts I would think assessment might be possible regarding the relevance of 'liquid life' as a viable theoretical notion for understanding contemporary media.