Article: Pandemic, Participatory Culture and Reinvention of Everyday Life

How do we define participation during a pandemic? Are we in an era that requires reinventing our physical space and our modes of participation to build a new society? The novel coronavirus has deconstructed social space as we know it, and significantly disrupted our participation in its spheres. Today we are witnessing new forms of space, in the light of the ongoing pandemic and its impact on our participation, physical space and digital culture. This article demonstrates changes that occur in the physical and connected spaces that form our “new virtual urbanism” (Doueihi, 2011). It describes participation practices in natural parks in Geneva-Switzerland and Pays de Gex-France, distinguishing three types of spaces: the pre-pandemic space, the confinement space and the deconfinement space. It shows how socio-cultural practices changed in relation to the configuration of the space and the use of digital technology. Will we need to reinvent our space to encourage participation? The answer lies perhaps in considering the development of our digital traces and harvesting them in organized projects with rules, purpose, administration, management and governance. In this sense, digital participation becomes full and efficient when it relies on the process of building a memory and includes those who find themselves excluded from this new world.

To read the article: http://ejournal.atmajaya.ac.id/index.php/interact/article/view/2322

To cite the article : Saba Ayon H. (2021). Pandemic, Participatory Culture and Reinvention of Everyday Life. Jurnal InterAct, Vol. 10, N° 1, p. 10-18. ISSN (Print) 2252-4630/ ISSN (Online) 2614-1442.

Webinaire 3 : Avantages et défis de l’intelligence artificielle dans la communication des campagnes publiques, Jakarta – Le Havre, 23 septembre 2021

Le laboratoire de recherche IDEES Le Havre à l’Université Le Havre Normandie en France et l’Ecole de Communication à l’Université Catholique de l’Indonésie Atma-Jaya à Jakarta organisent un 3ème webinaire dans la série Road to the International Conference on Corporate and Marketing Communication (ICCOMAC).

Dans ce webinaire, intitulé Advantages and Challenges of Artificial Intelligence in Communicating Public Campaigns et diffusé du Havre (09h-12h, heure de Paris), interviendront :

Béatrice Galinon-Mélénec (Professeur émérite en sciences de l’information et de la communication à l’Université Le Havre Normandie) sur « Le paradigme anthropo-sémiotique de l’Homme-trace au service de l’éthique. Application au système numérique de santé » et ;

Lukas (Professeur agrégé à la Faculté d’ingénierie à Atma Jaya).

https://umr-idees.fr/2021/09/02/avantages-et-defis-de-lintelligence-artificielle-dans-la-communication-des-campagnes-publiques-advantages-and-challenges-of-artificial-intelligence-in-communicating-public-campaigns-3eme-webinaire/

Termes de référence : https://www.atmajaya.ac.id/web/KontenFakultas.aspx?gid=berita-fakultas&ou=fiabikom&cid=ICCOMAC-3

* Quelques références sur le paradigme “Homme-Trace” proposé par Béatrice Galinon-Mélénec, fondatrice du e. laboratory on Human Trace Complex System Digital Campus UNESCO et fondatrice et rédacteur en chef du Carnet de recherches ICHNOS ANTHROPOS ; et des travaux de l’Ecole Française sur la Trace :

Introduction to Cyber Law and Public Communication webinar, Jakarta-Le Havre

Good morning all and welcome to our second webinar in the series of Webconferences: Road to International Conference on Corporate and Marketing Communication (ICCOMAC), organized by the School of Communication at Catholic University of Indonesia Atma Jaya in Jakarta and Le Havre Normandie University in France.

I am Hadi Saba Ayon, PhD. in Information and Communication Sciences at the research laboratory UMR 6266 CNRS IDEES Le Havre and I will moderate the debate in this webconference with my colleague Dr. Nia Sarinastiti from the School of Communication in Atma Jaya.

Why do we talk about digital law and public communication today? The Covid-19 pandemic, which has accelerated digital transformation in almost all areas of life, shows us every day the fragility of the digital ecosystem in which we live.

Governments, organizations and individuals find themselves at the mercy of the digital giants that dominate and control multiple digital services: coding, software development, access provision, data hosting, processing, and more.

These companies, whether American (GAFAM) [Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple et Microsoft] ou chinoises (BATX) [Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent et Xiaomi], monopolize a large part of the functions that we, digital users, need to inhabit and live in digital, described by Milad Doueihi (2011), historian of religions, philosopher and holder of the Humanum Chair, which is dedicated to digital humanism, at University of Paris Sorbonne (Paris-IV), as “virtual urbanism”, marked by hybridization, and characterized by increase and immersion.

Personalized information, which hides or on which a recommendation economy is based, is mediated by search engines, emails, communication services, social networks, shopping applications, health platforms, trade services, etc. The vast majority of its services are within the reach of digital giants.

And with digital traceability, a surveillance system is developing, threatens and harms privacy and questions the rights of individuals, organizations and even governments. In addition, it endangers our “digital life” and questions our “living together” in the information society.

Marcello Vitali-Rosati of the University of Montreal recalls that the influence of GAFAM does not depend “on digital” (as a cultural phenomenon), but on certain specific uses: those of proprietary software and hardware. He writes in his text “Being free in the digital age” (2019):

“Concretely, the scourge of which we are victims is represented by the fact that in all areas, from private life to public life through professional activity, we are encouraged to use proprietary solutions: MacOs, iOS, Windows, Word, Adobe, Facebook, Whatsapp, Skype, Gmail, Outlook (…). Our life is influenced and structured by these tools without our being able to precisely understand the principles. The affordances of platforms push us to certain practices, notifications punctuate our rhythms of life, data and document formats structure the organization of our thinking; we don’t know what happens to our data and who can access it”.

According to him, “digital” does not exist as such, but there are many different practices, uses, tools and environments, based on particular principles, and promoting varied values and consequently, leading to diverse effects. This leads us to be critical of digital.

Digital companies want to sell their products, it is their rights. But what about the role of public and private institutions?

What regulations should be put in place to organize the digital space and preserve the rights of its inhabitants?

Can we guarantee a right to digital oblivion where the user can be assured that the data that he himself has decided to remove from his publication space is not kept by the platform and it will not be used?

Can we speak about “digital manners to live together” or a transliteracy to be developed to circumvent the conditions dictated by a small group of digital companies?

Louise Merzeau (2017) from Paris 10 University recalls that a culture is never limited to a know-how, it is rooted in memory, ethics and politics.

There are many issues that occupy an important place in everyone’s life today, especially in a pandemic period when digital technology complements the role of institutions in the economic, educational, health and other fields.

To discuss them, we are pleased to welcome Dr. Bénédicte Bévière-Boyer from the Department of Law at the University of Paris 8 Vincennes – Saint-Denis in France and Dr. Yuliana Wahyuningtyas from the Department of Law at Atma Jaya, who will debate about digital law and public communication.

Thank you all for your participation, and have a nice conference.