Commodification of Labor on the Instagram Account
@menjadimanusia.id
Okza Hendrian Wijaya1*, Shazleen Mohammed1
1 Faculty of Communication and Media Studies, Universiti Teknologi Mara, Shah Alam, Malaysia
*Corresponding Author: [email protected]
Accepted: 15 August 2022 | Published: 1 September 2022
DOI:https://doi.org/10.55057/ijbtm.2022.4.3.4
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Abstract: @menjadimanusia.id is an alternative media and social platform for those who want to share and hear stories about life from various perspectives, and are expected to be a ladder to get a speck of hope for those who have problems in life. In this case, there is subtle exploitation of the audience who are already interested and feel facilitated by the
@menjadimanusia.id site that they voluntarily share their concerns, as well as their personal stories for public consumption. This study aims to reveal the forms and processes of commodification experienced by the audiences who send their personal stories to the
@menjadimanusia.id account. It uses a critical paradigm with a descriptive-qualitative approach through content analysis and interviews by developing political economy communication through the commodification of labor as a theoretical framework. The findings suggested that the commodification occurs in the content production process by the
@menjadimanusia.id account which places the audience's as the main source of the content.
The form of commodification experienced by the audience is the exploitation of content owners and unpaid digital labor.
Keywords: Commodification, @menjadimanusia.id, Labor
___________________________________________________________________________
1. Introduction
Internet users have grown rapidly in recent times. Internet media is no longer just a communication medium, but is an inseparable part of the world of business, industry, education and social interaction. Especially in the rapidly growing social media. The booming social media such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Youtube, and Whatsapp, are all products of new media technologies and are now loved by many Internet users have grown rapidly in recent times.
For this reason, the political economy of communication approach is here to examine the operation of the communication business, consumer behaviour and examine how the media as a communication resource utilizes consumer behavior into products to be sold in the market.
The concept of political economy of communication is a study used to understand how the operation of power as well as exploitation works in the communication business industry (Mosco, 2009).
A study conducted by Fuchs (2014) for example, explains that users are productive consumers who produce commodities and create profits for social media corporations. Users carrying out
activities on social media seem to be happily playing without knowing that their data is secretly sold by social media corporations into targeted advertisements (Faucher, 2018). The business model of Facebook and other social media platforms can work smoothly by encouraging users to provide their data, then using the data for commercial purposes (Anthony & Stark 2018).
Social media in its development has become a space and mechanism to expand capital accumulation. Data about personal information and preferences from work-play on Facebook, for example, becomes a commodity for social media corporations to sell to other corporations in the form of advertisements (Ritzer et al. 2012: 388). Smythe in Mosco (2009) explains that audiences are the main commodity in the media industry. According to Cristian Fuchs and Sebastian Sevignani (2018), activity on social media has alienated humans. They see activity on social media as productive work (work to make commodities) that alienates humans in four ways: alienation from oneself, alienation from productive work objects (products and objects of productive work), and alienation from the products they create.
The alienation of these four sides forms the alienation of the entire production process caused by class relations and results in exploitation. The production process in question is content production activities on social media which become data for social media corporations such as Facebook. Ownership of production facilities which condition the regulation of all social media platform policies makes social media corporations claim ownership of user data. Meanwhile, social media users do not enjoy the data of their work. That's what makes them alienated from the work done on social media, while they only get use values in the form of information, social relations, and certain profiles. In short, the idea of Cristian Fuchs and Sebastian Sevignani (2018) that besides internet users being used as a commodity, they are also alienated.
In addition, technological developments, especially in the era of media digitalization, new media platforms use active audiences as workers to increase the platform's rate capacity. So that the platform gets a commercial advantage while the user does not get a profit, this is common in various new media platforms. Like Google, which develops the platform through audience-generated content. Andrew Keen argues that, Google is a parasite, because it creates content that it does not own (Muzairi, 2014). Furthermore, experts such as Dyer-Witheford and Hearn (2010), Scholz (2012), Fuchs and Dyer-Witheford (2013) call it digital labour. Digital Labor is considered as a new style of commodification mode in today's digital platform era.
Based on these previous studies. The author wants reveal the same thing to the active audiences on the social media Instagram. Nasrullah (2016) defines social media as a medium on the Internet that allows users to present themselves either by interacting, collaborating, or sharing among members or users and forming virtual social bonds. Based on the fact that the use of social media is increasingly massive and has a broad impact. Sudibyo (2019) views social media as having an ambiguous position. The ambiguity is that it becomes a social as well as economic institution. This indirectly gives birth to business opportunities.
@menjadimanusia.id social media account is a clear example of this ambiguity. This account contains content that departs from the personal problems of young people such as mental health, romance, sexual violence and others. All of these problems are presented in the form of quotes or short narratives, stories and video interviews using themes that relate to the lives of young people. This makes @menjadimanusia.id a success to attract a lot of attention. Until now, his social media account followers have reached 1 million. In addition,
@menjadimanusia.id also often conducts polls for its followers by providing a place on the Instagram account instastory or feed, related to problems accompanied by certain themes, the
followers of @menjadimanusia.id account are asked to tell stories about their personal experiences or points of view. Then, the results of the stories of these followers can be used as content material on the @menjadimanusia.id account.
Quoted from Instagram @menjadimanusia.id, the contribution of writing at
@menjadimanusia.id is volunteer, never asking for and giving payment in any form. In addition, posts on Instagram @menjadimanusia.id always invite their followers to tell stories in the comments column. This is in accordance with what was expressed by Andrew Keen to Google is a parasite, because it creates content that it does not own (Muzairi, 2014).
The objectives of this study to reveal the form of commodification experienced by the audiences / followers to the @menjadihuman.id Instagram account as well as to uncover the process of the menjadimanusia.id Instagram account utilizes the audiences to be source of the content. It will focus on audiences who are followers of the @menjadimanusia.id Instagram account, have interacted with the account, contribute to content creation as well as share, or make comments on the content.
Research on commodification that has been carried out by previous researchers such as Ritzer (2012), Butosi (2012) Faucher (2018), focuses on the form and process of commodification where the audience in the form of targeted advertising or data is used for commercial purposes.
In further research, the author will explain how the audience is used as a source of content producers and place the audience as free workers by connecting the commodification concept from Mosco (2009) and Digital Labor which is supported by Dyer-Witheford and Hearn (2010), Scholz (2012). , Fuchs and Dyer-Witheford (2013) and refers to the idea of Cristian Fuchs and Sebastian Sevignani (2018) that activities on social media have alienated humans and there is a commodification process that occurs to the audience. So that it can provide a further picture of the forms and processes of commodification that occur in the era of networking or social media.
2. Literature Review
@menjadimanusia.id is social media account which attracting many audiences attention because the content is very related to our daily experiences. This account offers a place to story anything related to experiences audiences have been experienced in real life. For instance, family, friends, work to other unique experiences are personal. But, These accounts make followers or audiences a source of content and seem to make them conscious free workers who are ready to produce content through their writings, personal stories, their comments when interacting with the account to spread the content to other audiences. The practices performed by the social media account menjadimanusia.id can be accomplished as a form and commodification process.
Commodification understood as "the process of transforming" uses value into exchange values” (Mosco, 2009). These processes and practices continue to experience development. If previously commodification only done by mainstream media (conventional), then now it can be done by anyone new media users (Rianto,2020). Commodification is usually defined as the activity of media managers in treating messages as commodities that can please the audience, invite advertisers, and extend the media business (Halim, 2013: 50).
Commodification can be done between social media users, in addition to global platform companies such as YouTube, Instagram, or Facebook to name a number of. Like the old media,
audiences in new media also become objects commodification, but not just for sale to advertisers as said by Dallas Smythe (Mosco, 2009), but quantity audience is also used as a benchmark for collaborate with other parties who want to gain more mass. Here, the quantity indicated by the quantity subscribers, for example, become social capital and economy. Bleeke and Ernest, in that case stated, “In the future, it will happen collaboration growth over competition as a strategy to establish cross-border economic and business relations” (Raharja, 2009). As stated by Jhally & Livant (1986; Sudibyo, 2019), the audience who treated like an unconscious worker exploited by the investors, "watching as" working,” also occurs in new media.
Sudibyo (2019) views social media as having an ambiguous position. The ambiguity is that it becomes a social as well as economic institution. This indirectly gives birth to business opportunities.
Technological developments, especially in the era of media digitalization, new media platforms use active audiences as workers to increase the platform's rate capacity. So that the platform gets a commercial advantage while the user does not get a profit, this is common in various new media platforms. Like Google, which develops the platform through audience-generated content. Andrew Keen argues that, Google is a parasite, because it creates content that it does not own (Muzairi, 2014., Lessig, 2008). Furthermore, experts such as Dyer-Witheford and Hearn (2010), Scholz (2012), Fuchs and Dyer-Witheford (2013) call it digital labour. Digital Labor is considered as a new style of commodification mode in today's digital platform era.
This is in accordance with what was expressed by Andrew Keen to Google is a parasite, because it creates content that it does not own (Muzairi, 2014).
3. Methodology
The research design in this study used a critical paradigm with descriptive qualitative method.
Referring to Gubah and Lincoln (1994) The basic assumption of the critical paradigm is that there is a structure that shapes reality which we consider to be something natural. The critical paradigm tries to dismantle the mastermind that influences the formation of a person's perception so that he perceives a reality as natural. Qualitative research is research that intends to understand the phenomenon of what is experienced by research subjects behavior, perception, motivation, action and others, holistically, and descriptively in the form of words and language, in a special context that is natural and natural. by utilizing various natural methods (Moeleong, 2013).
The data analysis uses content analysis and depth interviews. Content analysis is a research method using a set of procedures to make valid inferences from texts (Weber, 1994). According to (Moleong, 2005: 186) in-depth interview is a process of digging in depth, open, and free information with problems and research focus and is directed at the research center. There are two outlines of the data sought in this study, namely about how the form of commodification that occurs in the Instagram account into @menjadimanusia.id and the commodification process experienced by audiences/followers. For the form of commodification, the details are as follows: first, using a document study of the content on the Instagram becamehuman.id account, consisting of posts and instastory polls along with a collection of stories from their followers. Second, observation. It is carried out virtually on the content and activities on the Instagram account to @menjadimanusia.id. Starting from the content creation process to the interaction of the menjadimanusia.id account with its followers.
To explore data that is specifically related to the commodification of audiences, there are three steps taken. First, the interview which conducted on several followers with the main focus knowing the motivation to follow the account and why they are willing to share their content voluntarily. This interview session uses a structured interview type. Second, document study.
carried out on content on the Instagram @menjadimanusia.id account which shows cooperation with other parties. Third, observation. Make virtual observations of the interaction of the menjadimanusia.id account with its followers.
The researcher will use purposive sampling as a sampling technique. According to Arikunto (2006) Purposive sampling technique is a technique of taking data not based on random, but based on considerations to achieve a specific target or focus. Based on the opinions of the experts above, it can be concluded that this sampling technique is a technique in collecting data from a population based on the existence of certain targets or objectives in a study.
Furthermore, In regards to the followers of the manusia.id account who became informants, there were 3 respondens in this study. Nasution (1992) revealed that the qualitative method had a small sample and was chosen according to the purpose of the study. Researchers use their judgment or intuition to select the best people or groups to study or in this case provide accurate information. The group called "the typical and the best people" considered by the researchers to be selected as research subjects by Williamson, at.al. (1982:107).
4. Conclusion
Instagram is not only a social platform but also a business platform. This can be found on the Instagram account @menjadihuman.id which commodifies its audience by placing them as sources of content and unpaid workers. There are 3 contents on the Behuman.id account sourced from the audience, namely quote content, question/polling content, and audience story content. Indirectly, the commodification of the audience on the behuman.id account is also a form of worker commodification. The power of narrative and words are instruments that create false awareness (mystification) of the audience and perceive it as something natural (normalization). In addition, the audience also feels facilitated by the presence of the becamehuman.id account as a forum for venting, and good listeners, to channel stories, experiences, thoughts with the aim of gaining inner satisfaction, getting friends who experience the same situation, and getting out of loneliness.
References
Arikunto. 2006. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta : PT. Rineka Cipta.
Burston, Jonathan, Nick Dyer-Witheford and Alison Hearn, eds. 2010. Digital Labour:
Workers, Authors, Citizens. Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization 10 (3).
Butosi, C. (2012). Social Net-working: Exploring the Political Economy of the Online Social Network Industry [The University of Western Ontario]. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/693 Faucher, K. X. (2018). Social Capital Online: Alienation and Accumulation (Critical Digital
and Social Media Studies). University of Westminster Press.
Fuchs, C. &. Sevignani, S (2013). What is Digital Labour? What is Digital Work? What’s their Difference? And Why do theese questions matter for understanding social media?, . tricple C : Communication, Capitalism & Critique, 273-293.
Fuchs, C. and V. M. (2013). Marx and the Political Economy of the Media. Leiden and Boston:
Brill.
Fuchs, Christian. 2014. Social Media. A Critical Introduction. London: Sage. Fuchs, Christian and Wolfgang Hofkirchner. 2005. Self-Organization, Knowled.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K.
Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–117). Sage Publications, Inc.
Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. London: NYU Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qffwr.
Lessig, L. (2008). Remix Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy. London:
Bloomsbury Publishing PLC.
Levinson, Paul. (1999). Digital McLuhan: a Guide to Infromation Millenium. London and New York: Routledge.
Lukacs, G. (1971). History and Class Consciousness: Studies in Maxist Dialetics.
Massachusetts: The Mit Press.
Moleong, L. J. (2018). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya.
Mosco, V. (2009). The Political Economy of Communication. SAGE Publications Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446279946.
Muzairi. (2014). Fetisisme Komoditi dan Mistifikasi dalam Iklan. Refleksi UIN Sunan Kalijaga, 194-203.
Muzairi. (2014). Fetisisme Komoditi dan Mistifikasi dalam Iklan. Refleksi UIN Sunan Kalijaga, 194-203.
Nasrullah, R. (2016). Media Sosial: perspektif komunikasi, budaya, dan sosioteknologi.
Bandung: Simbiosa Rektama Media.
Nasution (1992), Metode Penelitian Naturalistik Kualitatif, Penerbit Tarsito, Bandung.
Novianto, A., & Wulansari, A. D. (2019). Kerja Tak Terbayar di Media Sosial: Alienasi dan Eksploitasi Pekerja yang Tersamarkan dalam Kapitalisme Digital. Jurnal Studi Pemuda, 6(2), 651. https://doi.org/10.22146/studipemudaugm.3 9744.
Pratopo M, W. (2017). Komodifikasi Wartawan di Era Konvergensi: Studi Kasus Tempo.
Jurnal Komunikasi Indonesia, 129-138
Ritzer & Goodman. (2004). Teori Sosiologi Modern. Jakarta: Kencana Media Prenada.
Saura J.R. Using data sciences in digital marketing: framework, methods, and performance metrics. J. Innov. Knowl. 2020;1 doi: 10.1016/j.jik.2020.08.001. 2020.
Smythe, Dallas W. 1981. The Audience Commodity and its Work. In Dependency Road.
Communications, Capitalism, Consciousness, and Canada, 22-51. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Stieglitz S., Mirbabaie M., Ross B., Neuberger C. Social media analytics – challenges in topic discovery, data collection, and data preparation. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2018;39:156–168. doi:
10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.12.002.
Sudibyo, A. (2019). Jagat Digital: Pembebasan dan Penguasaan. Jakarta: Kepustakaan Populer Gramedia.
Toffler, A. (1980). The Third Wave. New York: William Morrow.
Anthony, Denise & Luke Stark. 2018. “Jangan Berhenti Pakai Facebook tapi Jangan Mempercayainya”.(https://theconversation.com/janganberhenti-pakai-facebook-
tapijangan-mempercayainya-juga94506). Access on 27/06/2022.
Fuchs, Christian & Sevignani, Sebastian. 2018. Mengenal Perbedaan Kerjateralienasi Digital (Digital Labour) dan Kerja-Umum Digital (Digital Work). -: Indoprogress
