Media Technology and Media Logic(s): The Media Grammar Approach

Part of the Transforming Communications – Studies in Cross-Media Research book series (TCSCMR)


In the digital age user empowerment and ubiquitous technologies are categories, which reshaped the media system and changed society as a whole. The media logic approach offers parameters for an analysis of media developments and hence can also help explain the structural qualities of digital media. In this chapter, a model of media grammar will be introduced: “Surface grammar” is visible and accessible to the user, is subject to usability as well as user acceptance and can thus determine the economic success of the medium. “Property grammar” is constitutive for the medium itself and helps to form the “networked logics.” It is argued that a new reflection on the power of technological logic is needed, which also includes user perspectives and user cultures.


  1. Adler, P. (2006). Technological determinism. In: S. Clegg & J. R. Bailey (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of organization studies (Vol. 4). London and New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Altheide, D., & Snow, R. (1979). Media logic. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Altheide, D. L., & Snow, R. P. (1992). Media logic and culture: Reply to oakes. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 5(3), 465–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bennett, L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The logic of connective action: The personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bimber, B. (1994). Three faces of technological determinism. In: M. R. Smith & L. Marx (Eds.), Does technology drive history? The dilemma of technological determinism (pp. 79–100). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bucher, T., & Helmond, A. (2017). The affordances of social media platforms. In: J. Burgess, T. Poell, & A. Marwick (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social media. London and New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Castells, M. (2005). The network society: From knowledge to policy. In: M. Castells & G. Cardoso (Eds.), The network society: From knowledge to policy (pp. 3–21). Washington, D.C.: John Hopkins University.Google Scholar
  8. Chapman, J. (2005). Comparative media history: An introduction: 1798 to the present. New York: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  9. Cooper, B. B. (2013). The surprising history of twitter’s hashtag origin and 4 ways to get the most out of them. Retrieved from
  10. Couldry, N. (2014). Media logic revisited. In: A. Hepp & F. Krotz (Eds.), Mediatized worlds: Culture and society in a media age. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  11. Couldry, N., & Powell, A. (2014). Big data from the bottom up. Big Data & Society, 1(2), 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dang-Anh, M., Einspänner, J., & Thimm, C. (2013). Kontextualisierung durch Hashtags. Die Mediatisierung des politischen Sprachgebrauchs im Internet. In: H. Diekmannshenke & T. Niehr (Eds.), Öffentliche Wörter. Perspektiven Germanistischer Linguistik (PGL) (pp. 137–159). Stuttgart: ibidem.Google Scholar
  13. Gibson, J. J. (1982). Notes on affordances. Reasons for realism: Selected essays of James J. Gibson (pp. 401–418). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  14. Gottfried, J., & Shearer, E. (2016). News use across social media platforms in 2016. Retrieved from
  15. Helmond, A. (2015). The platformization of the web: Making web data platform ready. Social Media + Society, 1(2), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hender, J., & Mulvelhill, A. (2016). Social machines. The coming collision of artificial intelligence, social networking, and humanity. New York: Apress.Google Scholar
  17. Hjarvard, S. (2008). The mediatization of society. Nordicom Review, 29(2), 105–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Katzenbach, C. (2012). Technologies as institutions: Rethinking the role of technology in media governance constellations. In: N. Just & M. Puppis (Eds.), Trends in communication policy research: New theories, Methods and Subjects (pp. 117–138). Bristol: Intellect.Google Scholar
  19. Klinger, U., & Svensson, J. (2014). The emergence of network media logic in political communication: A theoretical approach. New Media Society, 17(8), 1241–1257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Latour, B. (1991). Technology is society made durable. In: J. Law (Ed.), A sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology and domination (pp. 103–131). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Madianou, M., & Miller, D. (2012). Polymedia: Towards a new theory of digital media in interpersonal communication. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 16(2), 169–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McLuhan, M. (1962). The Gutenberg galaxy: The making of typograhic man. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  24. Mehra, S. K. (2011), Paradise is a walled garden? Trust, antitrust and user dynamism. George Mason Law Review. Retrieved from
  25. Meyrowitz, J. (1998). Multiple media literacies. Journal of Communication, 48(1), 96–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Napoli, P. M. (2014). Automated media: An institutional theory perspective on algorithmic media production and consumption. Communication Theory, 24(3), 340–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the internet is hiding from you. New York: The Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  28. Scott, K. (2015). The pragmatics of hashtags: Inference and conversational style on twitter. Journal of Pragmatics, 81, 8–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Steiner, C. (2012). Automate this. How algorithms came to rule our world. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  30. Thimm, C., Dang-Anh, M., & Einspänner, J. (2011). Diskurssystem Twitter: Semiotische und handlungstheoretische Perspektiven. In: M. Anastasiadis & C. Thimm (Eds.), Social Media: Theorie und Praxis digitaler Sozialität (pp. 265–286). Frankfurt and New York: Lang.Google Scholar
  31. Thimm, C., Frame, A., Einspänner-Pflock, J., Leclercq, E., & Anastasiadis, M. (2016). The EU-Election on twitter: Comparison of German and French candidates’ tweeting styles. In: C. Holz-Bacha (Ed.), Europawahlkampf 2014. Internationale Studiem zur Rolle der Medien (pp. 175–204). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.Google Scholar
  32. Thimm, C., & Nehls, Patrick. (2017). Sharing grief and mourning on Instagram: Digital patterns of family memoriesCommunications, 42(3), pp. 327–349.
  33. Uricchio, W. (2011). The algorithmic turn: Photosynth, augmented reality and the changing implications of the image. Visual Studies, 26(1), 25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Van Dijck, J., & Poell, T. (2013). Understanding social media logic. Media and Communication, 1(1), 2–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wallach, W., & Allen, C. (2016). Moral machines: Teaching robots right from wrong. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Wyatt, S. (2008). Technological determinism is dead; long live technological determinism. In: E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 166–180). Cambridge and London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  38. Zettl, H. (2014). Sight, sound, motion: Applied media aesthetics. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  39. Zittrain, J. (2008). The future of the internet—and how to stop it. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of BonnBonnGermany

Personalised recommendations