Debates exist around whether we live in a new Web 2.0 post-industrial era, or whether little has changed in capitalist society. This contribution queries the relationship between new and old, arguing Hegelian dialectics helps explain how change and continuity can operate at different levels (Bhaskar, 1993). New and old reappear as categories shaping a field in which Nordenstreng’s (2007) distinction between critical and administrative research remains relevant. What is needed is a critical digital and social media studies that draws upon real-life alternatives (such as free software and the digital commons) to neoliberal principles. As Stuart Hall noted (Jhally and Hall, 2012), Cultural Studies’ move away from reductionist thinking ended by entirely forgetting the economy and capitalism that had not gone away. Hence, analysis in the UK needs to be informed by the political ­situation specifically Cameronism and Mayism (see Fuchs, 2016), with its co-opting of ­populist English nationalism and scapegoating tactics. Underlying a plurality of crises are influential economic trends: lower wage income, precarious labour, financialisation and the digitalisation of work. These developments – new and old, local and global, in BRICs countries and the West – pose difficult questions for progressive politics and for our field.

中文翻译：

---

什么是要做？新与旧在媒体理论中的作用-关键数字和社交媒体研究的时刻

关于我们是否生活在新的Web 2.0后工业时代，还是资本主义社会中几乎没有改变，存在着争论。这种贡献质疑了新旧之间的关系，认为黑格尔的辩证法有助于解释变化和连续性如何在不同的层次上起作用（Bhaskar，1993）。新旧事物作为类别重新出现，Nordenstreng（2007）在批判研究与行政研究之间的区分仍然有意义。所需要的是一项重要的数字和社交媒体研究，该研究利用新自由主义原则的现实替代方法（例如免费软件和数字公共资源）。正如斯图尔特·霍尔（Stuart Hall）所指出的那样（Jhally and Hall，2012），文化研究摆脱了还原主义思维，最终完全忘记了尚未消失的经济和资本主义。因此，英国的分析需要以卡梅隆主义和Mayism（参见Fuchs，2016）等政治局势为基础，并结合民粹主义英国民族主义和替罪羊策略。多种危机的背后是有影响力的经济趋势：较低的工资收入，不稳定的劳动力，金融化和工作数字化。金砖四国和西方国家的新旧，本地和全球发展都给进步政治和我们的领域提出了难题。