Скачать книгу

view of economic communication outlined above – that is, if we are willing to include novels, films, social media accounts or online forum discussions as instances of economic communication – then we will likely find that economic life is marked by a much wider range of ideas, values and beliefs than if we focused solely on the way that ‘the economy’, understood in conventional terms as the macro economy and particular industrial sectors, is represented on television and in the press. We may live in societies dominated by capitalist logics and forms of accumulation, or that depend on consumer spending for growth, but to believe in value plurality is to believe that our material circumstances do not necessarily exhaust our ways of thinking about the world. In much of what follows, therefore, I keep ‘value plurality’ as an open question: to what extent do particular modes of economic communication (e.g., promoting, informing, narrating), media (e.g., books, films) or genres (e.g., news, advice, self-help) imply or invoke particular sets of values, or particular ways of framing and constructing economic life?

      The idea that economic life may be governed by multiple logics can also be traced in Boltanski and Thévenot’s (2006) notion of competing orders of worth. In their work they find ‘critical tensions … at the heart of what constitutes the economy’ (2006: 9), based on conflicting ‘orders of generality’ – that is, different systems for evaluating what matters, and different principles of order. Thus, forms of economic action based on personal ties and attachments are not simply archaic in the context of modern organizations, but rather indicate a distinct way of evaluating and bringing order to a situation, tied to a substantive philosophy (in this case one of loyalty). Thus, one cannot say that a particular way of organizing economic action is ‘inappropriate’, because the six ‘orders of worth’ that Boltanski and Thévenot initially outlined all represent possible moral principles for guiding action. A given actor in a given situation may draw upon these in justifying his or her behaviour to others, or in reaching some kind of compromise about how to proceed.

      This value plurality can be seen in what follows in various ways. On the one hand, the book uses mainly British and American examples. As such, it is describing market societies where most goods and services are exchanged via the market, but also capitalist societies where production is for profit, and wealth and productive assets are privately held. This affects the content and argument of the book in important ways. For example, chapters 3 and 4 detail many instances where capitalist profit motives decisively shape the communication environment and where debate is not about whether but about how much capitalism distorts communication or interferes with the availability of information. On the other hand, market societies do not only consist of market-based forms of exchange, and capitalist economies typically include – and even depend upon – non-capitalist institutions and alternative forms of transaction and provisioning (Gibson-Graham 1996, 2006; Slater and Tonkiss 2001). Thus, there are other economic logics and practices at work even in the heart of advanced capitalist systems. Some of these alternative logics and practices can be seen in the examples of online exchange and communication, and new forms of digital currency, discussed in chapter 4, while the fictional narratives discussed in chapter 5 give some sense of the alternative philosophies of economic life that circulate even within societies apparently dominated by the profit motive.

      The book is divided into two parts. Part I considers the role of communication in economic life by exploring how economic actions, behaviours and practices can themselves be seen as communicative. In chapter 1, I explore how this idea has been developed in economic theory. Although economics seems to have little to say about communication, it actually has two quite distinctive perspectives. The first is the belief – seen in Adam Smith and much subsequent work – that economic actions are (non-verbal) forms of communication that can be observed as part of the market process. The second is the idea that ‘communication’ consists primarily in the acquisition or transfer of information. This idea has its roots in Hayek’s work on price, and is then further developed in information economics and parts of game theory. The chapter traces the evolution of these views, before considering whether the discipline’s approach to communication might be shifting in line with the rise of a more empirical trend in microeconomics.

      Chapter 2 explores the same

Скачать книгу