Kobieta (nie)nowoczesna. Wizerunek kobiety lat 60. propagowany na łamach miesięcznika „Ty i Ja”

The housing type of apartments, spread widely across South Korea, has penetrated deep into its domestic housing culture, thanks to their advantages in terms of convenience, resulting from the mass production of industrial capitalism, which prioritizes functionality and efficiency. However, capitalist social structures have been undergoing transformation in the 21st century. Under a new paradigm emphasizing creativity over functionality and efficiency, the characteristics of everyday life are also changing. We started with the question of apartment spaces, which featured there are only basic minimum functions with simple combinations of similar rooms, without being able to capture the current changed lifestyle. Therefore, this study focuses on newly emerging lifestyles resulting from this transition of social structures and the characteristics of residential spaces at present, centering on the “function of housing”. Based on these considerations, we aimed to establish the essential function of housing that is prioritized by this era. To this end, we first looked at the changes in the functions of housing before and after modern times. We found that the functions of housing that were complex in traditional society have been differentiated and that houses have changed into a more private space along with the post-modern advent of urban public areas. However, the recent shift in social structure has led to the emergence of new lifestyles, which has also called for new functions of housing. Therefore, in this study, through the analysis of recent lifestyle magazines and architectural magazines, we compared the general public’s and architectural experts’ perspectives on the changed functions of housing and the characteristics of the required residential space. Accordingly, this research analyzed articles containing interviews with residents in lifestyle magazines and articles of architects and critics in architectural magazines. In addition to our previous literatures on changes in “characteristics of residents” and “relationship between individual and family”, this study will ignite discussions on contemporary urban housing from diverse and multi-layered levels as an attempt to achieve sustainable housing where residents’ everyday lives and their residential spaces match.

Considering the intersection between managerial discourses, sexuality and contemporary cultural resources such as lifestyle magazines, this article reflects critically on the extent to which the discourses and techniques associated with the management of bureaucratic organizations have been incorporated into the (self-)management of sexuality and sexual relations. Locating its concern with sexuality within critical social theory, the article develops a critique of the work of those who emphasize the postmodernization of sexuality and the informalization of management. Drawing on recent research involving an analysis of management texts and lifestyle magazines, as well as a series of semi-structured interviews, it argues that contemporary cultural discourses on sexuality, permeated as they are by references to managerial imperatives such as efficiency and effectiveness, serve to arrest the inter-subjective aspects of eroticism (Bataille, 1962; Rose, 1995) and to reduce sexual relations in the contemporary era to yet another aspect of the ‘reflexive project of self’ (Giddens, 1992).

This chapter presents the research questions, approaches, and arguments of the book, asking how our everyday lives with media have changed after the smartphone. I introduce the topic of media use in everyday life as an empirical, methodological, and theoretical research interest, and argue for its continued centrality to our digital society today, accentuated by datafication. I discuss how the analytical concepts of media repertories and public connection can inform research into media use in everyday life, and what it means that our societies and user practices are becoming more digital. The main argument of the book is that digital media transform our navigation across the domains of everyday life by blurring boundaries, intensifying dilemmas, and affecting our sense of connection to communities and people around us. The chapter concludes by presenting the structure of the rest of the book, where these arguments will be substantiated in analysis of media use an ordinary day, media use in life phase transitions, and media use when ordinary life is disrupted. Citation Ytre-Arne, B. (2023), "Introduction: Media Use and Everyday Life in Digital Societies", Media Use in Digital Everyday Life, Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-80262-383-320231001 Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited Copyright © 2023 Brita Ytre-Arne License Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This work is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this book (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode. Can you remember your first smartphone, and did it change your life? I bought my first smartphone in the early summer of 2011, right before the birth of my first child. I can safely say that life was never the same again. Although the new phone was hardly the most significant change that happened, it became part of how I reconfigured everyday life. My coincidental timing of these events might be a personal particularity, but the early 2010s, only a little more than a decade ago, was a period in which smartphones became part of everyday life for lots of people. This happened in Norway where I live, and in other countries in the Global North, soon followed by broader proliferation worldwide (Avle et al., 2020). In 2021, it was estimated that more than 90 per cent of people had smartphone access in a growing number of countries around the globe (Deloitte, 2021). ‘Smartphones changed everything’, wrote the Wall Street Journal in 2020: ‘smartphones upended every element of society during the last decade, from dating to dinner parties, travel to politics. This is just the beginning’ (Kitchen, 9.9.2020). But while all of this was happening, people lived their lives, using smartphones along with other media old and new, interwoven with what was going on in their lives, and in the world around them. This book explores the role of media in our everyday lives in digital societies, after the proliferation of smartphones and in conditions of ubiquitous connectivity. I analyze everyday media use across platforms, content types and modes of communication, taking the perspective of how we live our lives with media – how we manage plans and practicalities, keep in touch with friends and family, seek information and entertainment, work and learn, take part in shared experiences, and connect to our social lifeworlds. We might do all of this in the space of one single day, and we might experience such a day as ‘ordinary’ – just normal everyday life. But media technologies are also part of our less ordinary days, important to how we manage life-changing transitions and special events in our personal lives, and to how we relate to local communities, political processes or global events. We use media to connect to each other, and to society – throughout an ordinary day, across the life course, and in times of disruption. The smartphone is emblematic of how our everyday lives with media are changing in a digital and hyper-connected society, and as such it is essential to the topic of this book. A central question I discuss is what it means that most of us now have a smartphone to reach for, from where we are and what we are doing, to manage multiple aspects of our daily lives: A mobile, flexible device we rely on to communicate, find information, entertain and assist us, often used in combination with other media, but also a device that enables tracking and surveillance of our movements and engagements, informing feedback loops based on our personal data. How has digital media use in everyday life changed after the smartphone? To answer these questions, I draw on classic scholarship on media and communication technologies in everyday life (Baym, 2015; Silverstone, 1994), and on recent analysis of digital ambivalence and disconnection (Syvertsen, 2020). With a user perspective, I situate smartphones and other kinds of digital platforms as part of broader media repertoires (Hasebrink & Hepp, 2017), with an interest in the totality and internal relationships of any kind of media that people use and find meaningful in their everyday lives. I further understand everyday media use as central to public connection (Couldry et al., 2010), to how we orient ourselves to a world beyond our private concerns. The book provides an updated perspective on media in everyday life after digital media has become increasingly embedded and ingrained in society. A purpose for the book is to fill a gap between classic (but old) discussions on everyday media use, and recent (but sometimes narrowly focused) studies of new technologies. Our understandings of everyday media use are still shaped by theories developed before the internet, before digital and social and mobile media. This book highlights rather than discards these understandings, but moves forward in tackling dilemmas of technological transformations, and by considering recent crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. I untangle how media becomes meaningful to us in the everyday, connecting us to each other and to communities and publics. The book offers empirical, methodological and theoretical insight on media use in digital everyday life. Why Everyday Life? ‘Everyday life’ is one of those concepts that everyone understands, but which is still difficult to define. The term is not internal jargon belonging to a particular research field, but instead recognizable across a range of contexts – we might even describe it as an ‘everyday’ term. One of the early ideas behind this book was to answer the questions: ‘But what do you mean by everyday life?’ and further ‘Why do you [meaning media use researchers] go on about everyday life?’. These are good questions. Let us start with the latter: Why everyday life? More precisely, why would someone interested in media use find it important to refer to everyday life for contextualization? In media and communication studies, interest in everyday life has a long history. The idea of everyday life has been central to approaches and research interests in cultural studies (Gray, 2002; Morley, 1992), media phenomenology (Pink & Leder Mackley, 2013; Scannell, 1995) or media ethnography (Hermes, 1995; Radway, 1984). The term has been particularly central to theories of domestication (Haddon, 2016; Silverstone et al., 2021) focused on processes of gradually integrating media technologies in the home. Roger Silverstone wrote a classic volume on Television and everyday life (Silverstone, 1994), arguing that in order to move past debates on television as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ and actually understand what it is, we have to consider television as embedded in tensions and dynamics of everyday life. Shaun Moores (2000) applied everyday life as a framework for understanding the historical development of broadcast media, and Maria Bakardjieva (2005) analyzed the domestication of computers and internet technologies in everyday life. Elizabeth Bird (2003) wrote The Audience in Everyday Life to argue for the relevance of ethnographic methods to understand our media-saturated reality, while Tim Markham (2017) wrote an introductory textbook titled Media and Everyday Life to present topics and thinkers in media studies through their relevance to daily life. All of the above are books on media with ‘everyday life’ in the title. Moreover, the term keeps popping up in journal articles on a variety of topics regarding media use: A comparative study of why people read print newspapers in the digital age refer to how different media are integrated into everyday life (Boczkowski et al., 2021), while a study of people who prefer online media at home find that digital alternatives are perceived to be better integrated into domestic everyday life (Müller, 2020). In analysis of how and why we follow news, the idea of the everyday provides a way of situating ordinary users at the centre of attention, by discussing everyday news use (Groot Kormelink & Costera Meijer, 2019) or everyday public connection (Swart et al., 2017). In debates about datafication and emergent technologies, the notion of the everyday is used to highlight human and social experiences with for instance self-tracking (Lomborg & Frandsen, 2016), smart homes (Hine, 2020) or algorithmic media (Willson, 2017). What do these different contributions have in common? They refer to everyday life to signal a position, because referencing ‘everyday life’ holds some empirical, methodological or theoretical implications. The term can be invoked to answer the ‘so what’-question: A compelling reason for why we need to study media at all is its relevance to everyday life (Silverstone, 1999). Today we can adapt this argument to why we need to study the smartphone – it is part of everyday life. Through such statements, we frame the smartphone as a technology and research topic that is recognizable and relevant to experiences and dilemmas each of us encounter. The smartphone has transformed society, but it has done so through our everyday interactions. Similarly: Why does it matter if people read international news or look at cat videos online, watch Netflix or Linear TV, listen to music on Spotify or prefer vinyl records? If you are interested in media business models or media policies, and find the choices users make a bit puzzling, you might need to look into motivations and contexts in everyday life to gain a deeper understanding of what goes on. Attention to everyday contexts can both complicate and enhance insights gained from other types of tracking and measurements of media use (Groot Kormelink & Costera Meijer, 2020). To understand new technologies, or connect critiques of these phenomena to people’s experiences, everyday life is an essential framework: It is easier to grasp the idea of ‘the Internet of Things’ (Bunz & Meikle, 2018) as having to do with whether your refrigerator needs internet connection, than through concepts such as machine learning or smart sensors. Sometimes the position signalled by referring to everyday life is explicitly normative. A key example is the debate on everyday experiences with datafication, or ‘the quantification of human life through digital information, very often for economic value’ (Mejias & Couldry, 2019). The idea of so-called ‘big data’ as more precise or valuable has been met with critical questions (Boyd & Crawford, 2012), and with concern for how audience engagement can be harvested and utilized for opaque purposes (Ytre-Arne & Das, 2020). In criticizing these developments, the notion of ‘everyday life’ is central to put the human experience of living in datafied conditions front and centre (Kennedy & Hill, 2018), or to focus on the people rather than systems (Livingstone, 2019). This interest further corresponds to feminist (D’Ignazio & Klein, 2020) and postcolonial critiques (Milan & Treré, 2019) of datafication and power. We can also signal analytical and methodological interests by referring to everyday life: The term is used to prioritize context over generalizability, and ordinary user perspectives and experiences over media professionals and institutions. This could imply attention to small acts of engagement in social media (Picone et al., 2019), and inclusion of seemingly mundane practices of media use (Hermes, 1995; Sandvik et al., 2016). An everyday life perspective is a backdrop for cross-media research (Lomborg & Mortensen, 2017; Schrøder, 2011) rather than pre-selecting which media to study based on the researchers’ preconceived notions of what matters. Qualitative researchers and ethnographers also draw on ‘everyday life’ as a term that points towards preferred methods: Talking to people about a day in the life (del Rio Carral, 2014), ‘capturing life as it is narrated’ (Kaun, 2010) with diary methods, and exploring experiences and reflections in informants’ own words. Some quantitative studies of media use also use the term (Hovden & Rosenlund, 2021) and research on everyday media repertoires can combine qualitative and quantitative approaches (Hasebrink & Hepp, 2017). I am also someone who often explain and position my key research interests through the notion of everyday life. A long-running interest in everyday life has informed my preference for qualitative and user-focused methods, in the studies I draw on in this book and in other projects. I have used the term ‘everyday life’ in the title of publications (Moe & Ytre-Arne, 2021; Ytre-Arne, 2012), and also explored how media use changes with biographical disruption to everyday routines (Ytre-Arne, 2019) or discussed audience agency in everyday encounters with digital and datafied media (Ytre-Arne & Das, 2020; Ytre-Arne & Moe, 2021a). For me, the everyday signals a perspective on why and how to study media use: it is important because it is part of daily life, it is interesting because everyday life is diverse and meaningful, and it is impossible to be done with because it changes constantly. I do not think there is any necessary contradiction between an everyday perspective versus a societal or political perspective on media use – instead, everyday life is where political dimensions of media are experienced, interpreted, and acted upon. This point runs as an undercurrent through the analyses of this book and is highlighted in the concluding chapter. What is Everyday Life? We have established that media are part of everyday life, and that research on media use is interested in everyday life. That is not to say that definitions everyday life abound in the literature referenced above, or in the field at large. Even classic contributions observe that commenting on the topic of everyday life might seem simplistic (e.g. Silverstone, 1994, p. 19). There is considerable variation in how precisely or extensively the concept is explained: Some works develop distinct philosophical understandings (e.g. Bakardijeva in Sandvik et al., 2016), or ground the term in substantial discussion of different theoretical positions (e.g. Cavalcante et al., 2017). Some authors define the term and how it connects to methodological and analytical frameworks in their studies). Others explain adjacent concepts to the everyday, such as the study mentioned above of why people still read print newspapers (Boczkowski et al., 2021), which draws on theories of ritualization, sociality and cultural contexts. Nevertheless, everyday life is theorized in disciplines from human geography (Holloway & Hubbard, 2001) to psychology (Schraube & Højholt, 2016). Some central philosophical contributions are Henri Lefebvre’s Critique of Everyday Life (1947), which formulates a Marxist-inspired argument about the importance of this sphere of human conduct in the face of capitalism and technological change, and Michel De Certeau’s The Practice of Everyday Life (1984) which emphasizes the concept of potentially subversive tactics in people’s navigation through daily life. Another key work is The Structures of the Lifeworld (Schutz & Luckmann, 1973) which formulates Alfred Schutz’ theory of the lifeworld in which everyday life is enacted, including spatial, temporal and social dimensions, and how we move through ‘zones of operation’ where people and places beyond our immediate surroundings are yet within ‘restorable reach’ to us, through the familiarity or routines in the everyday which we take for granted (1973). This understanding has been particularly important to phenomenological and sociological studies of media and technologies in everyday life. Such philosophical works on everyday life are briefly to referenced in studies of everyday media use, a understanding that is more or less For (1984) to discuss the role of media in daily on and a growing as as philosophical interest in everyday life as a research that media are not used in from one or from personal an example of the of media use in dynamics at that media are an part of the way the everyday is p. and points that have been up in discussions of media (Hasebrink & Hepp, and of media use as mundane but yet meaningful in everyday (Hermes, 1995; Sandvik et al., 2016). In study of early internet use at Bakardjieva provides a theoretical discussion of how and Lefebvre’s theories relate to communication technologies, the idea of a critical phenomenology to understand users as as Roger work on everyday life also Schutz’ understanding of the and further of the in a discussion of whether this lifeworld is different in conditions of (Silverstone, Silverstone debates about order and in a world of societal and new communication with an that television is we have seemingly to take for as a technology and social and as part of our everyday lives. these Silverstone emphasizes the of routines and familiarity in in the of the world at and a sense of these are the of social order and everyday life. the and for as as through the and our lives take and within those and and we to go about our or for the most the and the that to our and (Silverstone, 1994, p. In this everyday and a sense of a concept to describe of and in people’s experience of the world and sense of central to how people position in the world and to life is also a key concept in more recent theory of digital communication as when we through digital media, and in have our continued in the world 2021). discussion how of or through digital media can to the of the these theories of everyday life, some key dimensions Everyday life has to do with the of space and people and through which we make and relate to the and our position in it I draw on these dimensions to further situate media use in everyday life, how we use media for navigation across social Media Use in Everyday Life To understand media use – applied as an term for all kinds of relationships and with media and communication technologies – we need to situate media use as part of everyday life, in people’s lifeworlds. on the ideas above, of familiarity and and of spatial, social and dimensions, we can different and positions for media. I am particularly interested in how we use media to orient ourselves as we move through our everyday lives, as part of what I navigation across social What does this Everyday media use is because we do not it from – we rely on that we are regarding media use as as other aspects of everyday up in the and not you have done before – instead of the same of and the same on your smartphone. other and and media use practices are particularly essential to the of everyday life by Silverstone, Markham and are also a central concept in media and communication psychology and central to studies to grasp user over or across We everyday in and around – including media Everyday life multiple social domains – such as work and life – that are meaningful to us and that we with and that also important contexts for how we use media. There are research that of media use in different social for instance focused on life such as or experiences such as (e.g. Das, & 2020). between life such as a or a are so significant because the social domains of our everyday lives change with these events. These social domains are essential to the we find in life, the conduct of everyday life an We with social domains in – including media use and A interest I in this book is how we use media across and social for what I refer to as Everyday media use navigation across multiple social domains because an ordinary day can an of and in which we different social with different people. Everyday life can be and with to at or or but whether we have plans for or go with the some of and navigation is both and We conduct such navigation in – including media use and Digital technologies have become to this navigation – and but also and to We have established that media are part of daily and that such routines are essential to everyday life We can also discuss if and how the social domains of everyday life are or and how these processes (Couldry & Hepp, 2017; Hepp, 2020). But my main interest in this book is how our navigation across the social domains of everyday life changes with digital media – how we use digital media to connect to different social orient ourselves to what goes on and across contexts. Media use is essential to the navigation of everyday life, and the role of media in this navigation holds for how we experience our lives as meaningful, for how we understand and situate ourselves in the How we conduct this navigation is changing with the and datafication of the media, particularly after the smartphone. Media Use in Everyday Life The theories of everyday life that are most central to media and communication studies from an of and the domestic sphere is the social that has the most dynamics and the of the home are central to analyses from discussion of who the to what when the people television also have and computers & 2016). we can as Silverstone could in classic that is a domestic It is at home. at home. at (Silverstone, 1994, p. and mobile and social media a of the established when living and for a question in internet studies of whether and how people would actually to make space for computers in their homes is more not just by and but also by and technologies. The home is still but our navigation with media and beyond the home has A broader point is that the proliferation of digital media has it more difficult to make about how to situate media in everyday life, while media might be more important than to how we across our daily lives. This also has for the analytical concepts and approaches we to study everyday media To analyze media in everyday life, it is to a particular or media and look for its and in everyday to into how the cultural role of television in people’s everyday lives. But to for the for variation in everyday media use, it is more relevant to start with people and how we live our lives, and how media matters. of the scholarship discussed in this chapter for the of less approaches to media studies – media might need to be in order to understand what it I will particularly draw on approaches to situate media use in everyday life through a user Media repertoires and public Media repertoires is a concept to the totality and meaningful between media a (Hasebrink & & Hepp, 2017). the essential insight that are a key of approaches is to focus less on experiences with The of or using and instead how these or different are to each other in the context of a everyday media media approaches which media users have a how prioritize between different and how people and the totality of their media Media research has from how to of repertoires towards growing interest in repertoires as and how are and change over & Schrøder, et al., 2021; et al., Ytre-Arne, 2019). connection is a concept that people’s to society, in a sense – how people connect to public life, or (Couldry et al., et al., 2017; Ytre-Arne & Moe, The of a public connection – as to a focus on whether people follow news or – is to more what people are interested and how follow those across but also beyond (Couldry et al., & Ytre-Arne, 2021). Media is important to public connection, but not the only means of societal and public connection can take and define public connection as ‘the shared of that to and in and political in everyday life’ (Swart et al., and that relevance and engagement are dimensions in how media becomes meaningful in everyday life. of these perspectives imply that there is answer to or why media in everyday life – it is and perspectives are up to analysis of the that have to everyday media In this book, I draw on media approaches to analyze everyday media use from the perspective of and on the public connection concept to discuss how people connect to society through everyday media A More Digital Everyday Life A different way of situating media in everyday life is to if one the other, and if which way

This article attempts to reflect critically on the extent to which the discourses, techniques and imperatives associated with the management of work organizations are increasingly colonizing the everyday sphere of human communication and sense-making. Drawing on critical social theory and particularly Habermas’s account of ‘the rational organization of everyday life’, as well as what has come to be known as critical management studies (CMS), the article begins by locating itself within contemporary debates on management and everyday life. It then proceeds, drawing on recent research involving a critical analysis of post-Excellence management books, to map out the discourse commonly encountered in such texts before going on to explore the presence of a notably similar discourse appearing within contemporary cultural resources such as self-help manuals and, more notably, lifestyle magazines. It is then argued that such texts constitute a material signifier of what is an ongoing managerialist colonization of the everyday life world. This argument is substantiated with reference to a series of (group and individual) semi-structured interviews focusing on the lived experience of management, highlighting the encroachment of management discourse, techniques and imperatives on life outside work organizations. The article concludes by reflecting critically on some of the philosophical and political issues this potentially raises and, in doing so, aims to contribute to a critical discussion of the diffusion of management knowledge and ideology, particularly in relation to the subjective impact of managerialism on human relations.

In 2006 the high-street newsagent chain WHSmith decided that ‘lads mags’ Nuts and Zoo should not be shelved with other lifestyle magazines as they previously had, but would instead sit on the top shelf, within the area commonly associated with more adult material, and out of the reach of children’s hands. In doing so, WHSmith were responding to complaints from the public about the covers of these magazines which usually featured topless women. For those upset by this decision, it was evidence of the unnecessary encroachment of feminism into everyday life, in which the supposed harmless appreciation of the female body is a bit of a laugh, and quite different from pornography. Debates about the appropriacy of representations of women are quite common; many were outraged by the massive posters advertising Pulp’s This is Hardcore (1998), which depicted a naked woman, especially as the album’s title linked the picture to pornography. How do you respond to this; should Nuts and Zoo be classed as pornography, or are they the same as other magazines such as FHM or Loaded? Indeed, should FHM and Loaded also be put on the top shelf ? Why is it that such representations enrage some people, while others see them as harmless?

In Men and Masculinities in Contemporary China, Geng Song and Derek Hird offer an account of Chinese masculinities in media discourse and everyday life, covering masculinities on television, in lifestyle magazines, in cyberspace, at work, at leisure, and at home. No other work covers the forms and practices of men and masculinities in contemporary China so comprehensively. Through carefully exploring the global, regional and local influences on men and representations of men in postmillennial China, Song and Hird show that Chinese masculinity is anything but monolithic. They reveal a complex, shifting plurality of men and masculinities—from stay-at-home internet geeks to karaoke-singing, relationship-building businessmen—which contest and consolidate “conventional” notions of masculinity in multiple ways.

The patterns and characteristics of everyday life have been changing according to changes in social structure. However, South Korean apartment complexes as a representative urban housing type are still based on the Western tradition of modern working-class housing, and have been commodified in the context of consumer capitalism. Therefore, this research explores the contemporary lifestyles that should be supported in urban housing by analyzing the articles of lifestyle magazines. Based on this analysis, we derived the changed patterns of contemporary lifestyles in terms of residents’ characteristics, the relationship between individuals and family, the relationship between house and workplace, and the pursuing direction of residential space planning. These results can contribute to discover the contemporary characteristics of everyday life and its lifestyle; define the changed meaning of urban housing; and reduce the gap between living space and their lives for urban and social sustainability.

Destructive behavior, being the object of interdisciplinary analysis, is studied from the point of view of a proper, normatively conditioned socio-psychological action, which has its own grounds for reproduction and transmission at the individual, group, and community levels. The aim of the article is to consider a sociological retrospective of the socio-political foundations for the study of destructive behavior. The research framework provides for a combination and retrospective analysis of the socio-political foundations of destructive features in traditional (sociobiological, socioenergetic, socio-territorial approaches) and modern (organizational-management, polyparadigmatic approaches, centaur-problems and precarity) Russian practice. The approaches proposed by domestic sociologists of various periods of the historical development of Russia are considered. The views on destructive manifestations within the scientific approaches of Russian sociologists V.M. Bekhterev, P.A. Sorokin, D.A. Dril, E.V. De Roberti, M.M. Kovalevsky, Soviet researchers A.A. Bogdanov, A.K. Gastev, L.N. Kogan, as well as modern Russian sociologists O.N. Yanitsky, S.A. Kravchenko and Zh.T. Toshchenko, and a number of others are generalized. These approaches in their empirical results substantiate destructive behavior in a certain historical period of social and political development, and remain relevant and in demand for the research community at the present time. The described sociological approaches and concepts make it possible to identify complex social and political markers-indicators of destructive behavior. In particular, the following are distinguished: the dominant forms of social interaction “disenchantment of the world”, sustainable civic interest in resonant socio-political events, purposefulness of destructiveness, negative energy, cumulative effect of destructive activities, etc. Practices of manifestation of destructiveness in everyday life and in the modern perspective (projection for the future) are proposed. The described approaches in their content accumulate methods of borrowing destructive practices implemented at various levels of social and political interaction, in a localized and vast space, in individual-personal and collective fields. A new perspective for the development of the study of the social and political foundations of destructive behavior is digitalization of network relations and the possibilities of using a digital virtual environment with many metastructures and mediators of continuous communication operating 24/7 on data-mining platforms, and artificial intelligence (AI).

The purpose of this study was to highlight the content of radio programmes of Kazakh radio broadcasting for children, as an example of professional work on the education of the younger generation, from a modern perspective. The influence of audiovisual materials on the younger generation and their daily life, the formation of historical memory through images and associations. Analysis of the historical and cultural phenomenon of children's radio programmes in Soviet Kazakhstan. The materials of the study were both archival and field sources, opinions of domestic radio journalists, from the funds of Kazakh radio in the chronological framework of the stated topic, as well as thematic publications of domestic and foreign scientists. The methods of research were taken methods and principles of dialectical logic, the principle of historicism, allowing to take into account the general political situation in the USSR and external factors, which allowed to build a coherent methodology of work. The results of the study: a step-by-step reconstruction of the evolution of the content of Soviet (Kazakh including) radio broadcasting, intended for a certain age (children and teenagers); identification of co-dependence of the all-union content with the content of radio air of the union and autonomous republics; clarification of the structure of Kazradio and personnel potential, individual biographies of masters of national radio broadcasting; analysis of critical concepts of foreign researchers and others. Accordingly, the scope of application of the research results extends to the preparation of lecture courses in universities, writing generalising works on the history of ‘children's’ radio broadcasting in the republic in the Soviet period, recommendations for diversifying children's radio air. The author comes to the conclusion about the significance of the problem of differentiation of media (radio) content in Independent Kazakhstan, for the professional promotion of national values in the children and youth environment.

As media’s (e.g., television, movies, news) presence becomes increasingly prominent in individuals’ everyday lives, it is critical to consider how emerging adult men and women acquire gender norm information. Accordingly, this study explores how emerging adults’ everyday life gender norm experiences and media gender norm perceptions contribute to gender norm attitude formation and future gender norm expectations in family and career. Research has examined gender norm attitudes in relationship to everyday life, media, or future life expectations. Extending past research, this survey (n = 663) concurrently assesses the interrelationships between these constructs, employing social cognitive theory as a theoretical guide to frame hypotheses and interpret findings. Structural equation models (SEMs) illustrated emerging adults’ (M age = 20.32 years) traditional gender norm attitudes were positively correlated with traditional everyday life experiences and negatively correlated with traditional media perceptions. In each SEM, traditional gender norm attitudes positively correlated with traditional family division of labor expectations. Unexpectedly, male traditional gender norm attitudes negatively correlated with traditional career role allocation expectations. Finally, in both SEMs, only traditional everyday life experiences predicted traditional future expectations. Discussion focuses on the interplay between everyday life and media by considering the ways emerging adults may use each realm to shape gender norm attitudes and future expectations.

The purpose of this study was to develop a new framework for masculinity identity in Malaysia as a guideline for editorial images in men's lifestyle magazines. The study only investigated through editorial images as editorial images presents “models of masculinity” which may potently influence men (Kilbourne, 2000). The study used a combination of industry interviews and creative research method. Three editors from men's lifestyle magazines were interviewed and eighty men and women of different ages and backgrounds participated in the creative research method. The creative research method asked predominantly male and female participants to imagine a new editorial image aimed at men and then design/draw an editorial representing masculinity social construction in Malaysia and followed by a discussion from the participants. Two main frameworks emerged from the study: the thematic categories and views representing social and cultural notions of masculinity in Malaysia. In addition, the study also supported the first hypothesis that in large-scale multicultural societies like Malaysia there are likely to be multiple representations of masculinity identity. The second hypothesis of this research was supported when a new theme emerged from the creative research method. As borders blur, markets merge and cultures blend, ambiguity seems to have found its way to global mainstream. Ambiguity in masculinity is evident through the participants' drawing as the theme combines both masculinity and femininity as traits of a unified gender that defies social roles and psychological attributes.

This chapter examines the police and colonial hygiene in interwar Taiwan under Japanese rule from the perspective of colonial modernity in everyday life or everyday coloniality. I examine in general terms how a special type of police and hygiene exhibition came to be organised by the Taipei Police in 1925.1 Japan’s participation in world exhibitions can be traced to the end of the Tokugawa period, as early as 1862 and 1867. In 1903, a Taiwanese exhibit called the Hall of Taiwan (Taiwankan) appeared for the first time in the fifth Japan Domestic Exposition (naikoku kangyo hakurankai in Osaka. Five years later, in 1908, the first trade exposition took place in Taiwan (Taihoku bussan kyoshinkai By 1925, the practice of organising exhibitions in Taiwan had been well established, following the bureaucratic pattern developed in Japan but shaped by scientific knowledge applied to the colonial setting.2 Thus the Taipei police found it expedient to follow suit. The Taipei police hoped that the masses (shomin) could be aroused by a variety of propaganda techniques to the idea of self-policing (jikei) and mutual protection (kyoei), no doubt influenced by the popularity of expositions.3KeywordsCrime PreventionColonial GovernmentPhoto AlbumMiniature ModelColonial SettingThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This article examines how, as a centerpiece of France’s commercial beauty culture, the early twentieth-century beauty institute provided the strategies, goods, and professional opportunities required to make French women modern. An industry dedicated to women’s self-care and instrumental in making women visible (creating a look that in turn influenced how women would be seen) in the industrial metropolis, beauty institutes, I argue, provided a uniquely feminine path to modernity. Investigating institutes as both a commercial venture and a cultural enterprise, this article culls the autobiographies and personal letters of female entrepreneurs, the news items and advertisements posted in women’s lifestyle magazines, debates in trade journals, and a variety of beauty, health and hygiene manuals, to uncover women’s extensive involvement in and complex relationship to France’s modern beauty industry. Through these sources, the article considers less how business profited from women’s beauty work to illuminate how beauty work influenced pervasive cultural ideals regarding modern womanhood, thereby enabling French women to produce new social identities in the decades following the Great War.

This article looks at how specific gendered practices and ideas about female bodies were instrumentalized in the struggle for political authority during Egypt’s transitional period between 2011 and 2013. It argues that in the aftermath of the uprising, when Islamists won the parliamentary and presidential elections in Egypt, the figure of the “modern” woman gained renewed political significance. By exploring Egyptian English-language women’s lifestyle magazines, the article illustrates how socioeconomically privileged, Cairo-based women crafted “modern” female bodies and engaged in what Lila Abu-Lughod calls the “politics of modernity.” By delving into the world of Cairo’s wealthy and fashionable producers of lifestyle magazines, the article shows how specific bodily techniques and vocabularies of neoliberal feminism helped construct the idea of a “modern” woman. The “modern” female body then provided a location from which other bodies, considered traditional or not yet modern, could be judged. During Egypt’s transitional period, it was not the victimized Muslim woman who needed to be saved but the modern woman who felt that her lifestyle was under attack from Islamists. Based on an analysis of visual images and discourses, the article provides a contemporary example of the use of “modern” gendered subjecthood in creating hierarchies between women.

As scientific knowledge and technological prowess have grown, so too has the prevalence of cutting-edge innovations like virtual reality. Virtual reality (VR) technology is now being used in the digital media art industry. Because of the explosion of digital media art, animators now have more room to experiment with new ideas and techniques, bringing their work closer to the realities of viewers' everyday lives. So that they feel like an integral part of the conversation throughout. Artistic interactivity between the spectator and the moving pictures that were created for the screen is possible. The audience's traditional role as observers has shifted to one of active participants and witnesses. Artists and computers now work together to finish works and applications using digital media technology, which means that the production of such tools is no longer a one-way process. There is no denying that computer technology has had a profound impact on the visual representation of a wide range of works of digital media art, with animation design bearing the brunt of this effect. Modern animation design may benefit from the use of digital media art, which can deepen the meaning behind it and improve its aesthetic. At the same time, it may encourage the growth and development of digital media art and lead to shared progress.