Use what you know about critical theory to discuss Facebook and the culture industry. According to Ritzer, what is mass culture, and what is the culture industry? Would Facebook be considered a part of the culture industry? Having considered these arguments, do you agree or disagree that Facebook is a part of the "culture industry"?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Varies, but should include a definition of culture industry as the creator of mass culture-culture created by organizations or corporations intended for mass consumption that falsify reality, present themselves as authentic but are not authentically created art created by people, and that presents unchallenging messages that repress and mollify people rather than presenting challenging or upsetting messages that might result in social action or support for social change. Mass culture also ingrains certain brands as a part of creating a consumer culture that connects consumption to social class identities. Ritzer argues that Facebook does contain some mass culture, advertisements, and inauthentic content from companies and organizations, but it also contains content that is generated by people for people and is arguably spontaneous and authentic. Aside from some basic obscenity rules, Facebook exercises little control over the content, so perhaps it is not a part of the culture industry. However, another argument is that even if the content is not part of the culture industry, Facebook as a platform is a "culture industry" medium that makes billions of dollars for its owners. It also is repressing and pacifying people, so they don't act for social change or spend their time on more meaningful forms of social activism. Finally, it may be a more subtle, personalized, and possibly effective way to target market to individuals toward consumption of specific brands. The respondent can use these points however they like to argue that Facebook is a stronger culture industry or a weakening of culture industry.