What do you think?
Rate this book
By Any Media Necessary: The New Youth Activism
The participatory politics and civic engagement of youth in the digital age
There is a widespread perception that the foundations of American democracy are dysfunctional, public trust in core institutions is eroding, and little is likely to emerge from traditional politics that will shift those conditions. Youth are often seen as emblematic of this crisis―frequently represented as uninterested in political life, ill-informed about current-affairs, and unwilling to register and vote.
By Any Media Necessary offers a profoundly different picture of contemporary American youth. Young men and women are tapping into the potential of new forms of communication such as social media platforms, spreadable videos and memes, remixing the language of popular culture, and seeking to bring about political change―by any media necessary. In a series of case studies covering a diverse range of organizations, networks, and movements involving young people in the political process―from the Harry Potter Alliance which fights for human rights in the name of the popular fantasy franchise to immigration rights advocates using superheroes to dramatize their struggles― By Any Media Necessary examines the civic imagination at work. Before the world can change, people need the ability to imagine what alternatives might look like and identify paths by which change can be achieved. Exploring new forms of political activities and identities emerging from the practice of participatory culture, By Any Media Necessary reveals how these shifts in communication have unleashed a new political dynamism in American youth.
Read Online at connectedyouth.nyupress.org
There is a widespread perception that the foundations of American democracy are dysfunctional, public trust in core institutions is eroding, and little is likely to emerge from traditional politics that will shift those conditions. Youth are often seen as emblematic of this crisis―frequently represented as uninterested in political life, ill-informed about current-affairs, and unwilling to register and vote.
By Any Media Necessary offers a profoundly different picture of contemporary American youth. Young men and women are tapping into the potential of new forms of communication such as social media platforms, spreadable videos and memes, remixing the language of popular culture, and seeking to bring about political change―by any media necessary. In a series of case studies covering a diverse range of organizations, networks, and movements involving young people in the political process―from the Harry Potter Alliance which fights for human rights in the name of the popular fantasy franchise to immigration rights advocates using superheroes to dramatize their struggles― By Any Media Necessary examines the civic imagination at work. Before the world can change, people need the ability to imagine what alternatives might look like and identify paths by which change can be achieved. Exploring new forms of political activities and identities emerging from the practice of participatory culture, By Any Media Necessary reveals how these shifts in communication have unleashed a new political dynamism in American youth.
Read Online at connectedyouth.nyupress.org
- GenresNonfiction
352 pages, Hardcover
Published May 3, 2016
6 people are currently reading
121 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
April 15, 2018
Jenkins is always highly readable, and there are some interesting takes here. To boil it down, the book is opposed to the notion that contemporary youth is disengaged from politics, and in particular that digital activism is 'clicktivism' with no meaningful impact in the real world. I cherry picked chapters so cannot comment on everything in the book, but what I did read had the typical Jenkins tone of
overt optimism, a wealth of supporting evidence, and little interrogation of the grand claims being made. A sceptic could probably eviscerate some of his conclusions, but what I found most rewarding was his insistence on taking youth culture seriously, and in querying the notion of what counts as 'political'.
overt optimism, a wealth of supporting evidence, and little interrogation of the grand claims being made. A sceptic could probably eviscerate some of his conclusions, but what I found most rewarding was his insistence on taking youth culture seriously, and in querying the notion of what counts as 'political'.
August 8, 2017
1 – Youth Voice, Media, and Political Engagement: Introducing the Core Concepts (Henry Jenkins)
p.17 – Confronting a world dominated by broadcast media, owned by corporate monopolies and largely closed to grassroots messaging, Mark Dery (1993) urged activists to disrupt the flow, block the signal, and hijack the signs coming from Hollywood and Madison Avenue – an approach known as culture jamming. Dery projected that an alternative form of politics might emerge as networked communications became more widely accessible.
Today, rather than just jam the signal, activist groups surf media flows. Rather than seeing themselves as saboteurs who seek to destroy the power of popular culture, they regard popular narratives as shared resources that facilitate their conversations.
p.25 – Writing in regard to the immigrant rights movement in Los Angeles, Sasha Costanza-Chock (2010) notes important generational differences between older activists who seek to centralize the production and flow of messages and younger activists who want to multiply and diversity both the messages and the channels through which they flow: “transmedia mobilization thus marks a transition in the role of movement communication from content creation to aggregation, curation, remix and recirculation of rich media texts through networked movement formations” (114).
Transmedia mobilization expands what counts as participation. Because digital media practices can be participatory, transmedia mobilization requires co-creation and collaboration by different actors. Because it is open to participation by the social base of the movement, transmedia mobilization is the key strategic media form for an era of networked social movements. The theory of transmedia mobilization does not view media as apart from, but rather a part of social movement formation. Media, Costanza-Chock argues, is no longer solely serving the purpose of messaging; it also involves “strengthening movement identity formation and outcomes” (115).
Some forms of media production and participation are designed to help cement bonds within an emerging social movement, creating a context for shared identities or mythologies which enables participants to act collectively to achieve their shared social agenda.
p.36 – Benedict Anderson (1983) used the term “imagined community” to describe one of the come mechanisms shaping strong nationalist movements in the 19th and 20th centuries, people across the British empire read the Times of London, and through this shared experience and through the ways that the newspaper articulated a common agenda, they were able to connect diverse everyday experiences to a larger project of empire building.
p.37 – Today, the term “imagining communities” might be more productive. Young people are not simply accepting an agenda constructed by mass media for their consumption, rather they are actively co-constructing the contents of the civic imagination through networked communications. They are building a group identity that might fuel their campaigns and, within those campaigns, they are developing ways of expressing their shared visions for what a better society might look like.
In Anderson’s classic formulation, these communities were imagined because they consisted of massive numbers of people who would never meet each other face to face but somehow felt connected to each other; the same would be true for today’s imagining communities, except that in the context of a many-to-many networked communications system, the potential for direct contact between participants is different from what could have been achieved among the readers of the Times.
p.41 – Participation, as Nico Carpentier (2013) suggests, is a utopian ideal: “There is no end point. It will never be achieved. There will always be struggle, there will always be contestation. There will always be elitist forces trying to make things go back to the old ways” (266). Drawing from Carpentier, we see participation as an aspiration as much as it is a reality, something groups such as those we survey are striving to achieve.
p.52 – Carpentier proposes a productive distinction between “participating in” and “participating through” media. So, for example, while one is free to submit a wide array of videos through YouTube, the governance of that platform is controlled by its corporate owner, Google. No one can claim to be a citizen of YouTube, which is run for profit and not for the collective welfare.
2 – “Watch 30 Minute Video on Internet, Become Social Activist?” (Sangita Shresthova)
p.66 – One internet meme summed up the phenomenon: “Watch 30 Minute Video on Internet, Become Social Activist.” This meme is, in many ways, emblematic of a larger critique of so-called clicktivism, defined as the application of the metrics and methods of the marketplace (number of clicks) to measure the success of activist efforts.
p.17 – Confronting a world dominated by broadcast media, owned by corporate monopolies and largely closed to grassroots messaging, Mark Dery (1993) urged activists to disrupt the flow, block the signal, and hijack the signs coming from Hollywood and Madison Avenue – an approach known as culture jamming. Dery projected that an alternative form of politics might emerge as networked communications became more widely accessible.
Today, rather than just jam the signal, activist groups surf media flows. Rather than seeing themselves as saboteurs who seek to destroy the power of popular culture, they regard popular narratives as shared resources that facilitate their conversations.
p.25 – Writing in regard to the immigrant rights movement in Los Angeles, Sasha Costanza-Chock (2010) notes important generational differences between older activists who seek to centralize the production and flow of messages and younger activists who want to multiply and diversity both the messages and the channels through which they flow: “transmedia mobilization thus marks a transition in the role of movement communication from content creation to aggregation, curation, remix and recirculation of rich media texts through networked movement formations” (114).
Transmedia mobilization expands what counts as participation. Because digital media practices can be participatory, transmedia mobilization requires co-creation and collaboration by different actors. Because it is open to participation by the social base of the movement, transmedia mobilization is the key strategic media form for an era of networked social movements. The theory of transmedia mobilization does not view media as apart from, but rather a part of social movement formation. Media, Costanza-Chock argues, is no longer solely serving the purpose of messaging; it also involves “strengthening movement identity formation and outcomes” (115).
Some forms of media production and participation are designed to help cement bonds within an emerging social movement, creating a context for shared identities or mythologies which enables participants to act collectively to achieve their shared social agenda.
p.36 – Benedict Anderson (1983) used the term “imagined community” to describe one of the come mechanisms shaping strong nationalist movements in the 19th and 20th centuries, people across the British empire read the Times of London, and through this shared experience and through the ways that the newspaper articulated a common agenda, they were able to connect diverse everyday experiences to a larger project of empire building.
p.37 – Today, the term “imagining communities” might be more productive. Young people are not simply accepting an agenda constructed by mass media for their consumption, rather they are actively co-constructing the contents of the civic imagination through networked communications. They are building a group identity that might fuel their campaigns and, within those campaigns, they are developing ways of expressing their shared visions for what a better society might look like.
In Anderson’s classic formulation, these communities were imagined because they consisted of massive numbers of people who would never meet each other face to face but somehow felt connected to each other; the same would be true for today’s imagining communities, except that in the context of a many-to-many networked communications system, the potential for direct contact between participants is different from what could have been achieved among the readers of the Times.
p.41 – Participation, as Nico Carpentier (2013) suggests, is a utopian ideal: “There is no end point. It will never be achieved. There will always be struggle, there will always be contestation. There will always be elitist forces trying to make things go back to the old ways” (266). Drawing from Carpentier, we see participation as an aspiration as much as it is a reality, something groups such as those we survey are striving to achieve.
p.52 – Carpentier proposes a productive distinction between “participating in” and “participating through” media. So, for example, while one is free to submit a wide array of videos through YouTube, the governance of that platform is controlled by its corporate owner, Google. No one can claim to be a citizen of YouTube, which is run for profit and not for the collective welfare.
2 – “Watch 30 Minute Video on Internet, Become Social Activist?” (Sangita Shresthova)
p.66 – One internet meme summed up the phenomenon: “Watch 30 Minute Video on Internet, Become Social Activist.” This meme is, in many ways, emblematic of a larger critique of so-called clicktivism, defined as the application of the metrics and methods of the marketplace (number of clicks) to measure the success of activist efforts.
June 16, 2018
An interesting book that addresses a wide variety of youth "activism," understood in a very broad sense. On one level, the book is great in its exploration of various US-based youth groups engaging with digital media and how popular culture is inextricably linked to those efforts. This is one of the best aspects of the book that takes seriously such micro-politics and how they might lead to larger, more sustained movements. Scholars concerned with media activism definitely need to take such accounts much more seriously and give them their due.
With that said, there is often a certain idealization of the groups studied here, with the researchers at times seeming too close and unlikely to ask uncomfortable questions of those that they study. The Invisible Children section is the most emblematic of this limit. The chapter does a good job of adding a more sophisticated understanding of Invisible Children's actions and overall philosophy, which has been consistently overlooked in most accounts of the group. Yet, the article really soft-peddles on many of the issues that the Kony2012 video raises. Invisible Children was tied into a lot of Christian missionary type actions, which the article never even broaches. Instead it tends to individuate IC's actions as their own, but the problem is that they tie into wider imperialist practices: 1) a Christian missionary focus on Africa that can often border, if not play into, a post-colonial mentality; 2) how *Kony 2012* plays into a lot off racist Hollywood tropes of the "white savior complex" that films like *Last King of Scotland* and *Avatar* play into themselves. Miraculously, the article never interrogates the video's style and how much of its formal construction relates to certain commercial styles-- one of the founders is a USC film graduate, not surprisingly; and 3) the limits and advances with spectacle-based activism-- though the authors do cite Stephen Duncombe-- people like Stuart Hall and others are not mentioned.
The chapters often border on a fan-based celebration of what is being discussed rather than a more measured and distanced analysis. They at times fail to take into account wider historical and ideological contexts that their subjects are embedded within. The chapter on libertarian youth activists seems hopelessly dated with the rise of the alt-right and campus libertarian groups funded with Koch money like Turning Point USA. The chapter places a false equivalency between how many youth groups border between grassroots efforts and institutional support. But, seriously, the institutional support of a moderately wealthy donor and the infrastructure and enormous wealth of Kock money are two different worlds.
The book provides a good start of looking at under-explored youth activism-- particularly that concerning Muslim American youth. But, again, one wishes that the book provided a deeper understanding of these case studies. For example, even though the chapter on Muslim American youth rightfully suggests a tension between older institutions like CAIR with younger groups, there are still ways in which they are overlapping as much work in Minneapolis suggests. There is a bit too much overgeneralizing occurring in the book from very limited case studies and interview samples. Nonetheless, the work is appreciated and gives us something to build upon.
With that said, there is often a certain idealization of the groups studied here, with the researchers at times seeming too close and unlikely to ask uncomfortable questions of those that they study. The Invisible Children section is the most emblematic of this limit. The chapter does a good job of adding a more sophisticated understanding of Invisible Children's actions and overall philosophy, which has been consistently overlooked in most accounts of the group. Yet, the article really soft-peddles on many of the issues that the Kony2012 video raises. Invisible Children was tied into a lot of Christian missionary type actions, which the article never even broaches. Instead it tends to individuate IC's actions as their own, but the problem is that they tie into wider imperialist practices: 1) a Christian missionary focus on Africa that can often border, if not play into, a post-colonial mentality; 2) how *Kony 2012* plays into a lot off racist Hollywood tropes of the "white savior complex" that films like *Last King of Scotland* and *Avatar* play into themselves. Miraculously, the article never interrogates the video's style and how much of its formal construction relates to certain commercial styles-- one of the founders is a USC film graduate, not surprisingly; and 3) the limits and advances with spectacle-based activism-- though the authors do cite Stephen Duncombe-- people like Stuart Hall and others are not mentioned.
The chapters often border on a fan-based celebration of what is being discussed rather than a more measured and distanced analysis. They at times fail to take into account wider historical and ideological contexts that their subjects are embedded within. The chapter on libertarian youth activists seems hopelessly dated with the rise of the alt-right and campus libertarian groups funded with Koch money like Turning Point USA. The chapter places a false equivalency between how many youth groups border between grassroots efforts and institutional support. But, seriously, the institutional support of a moderately wealthy donor and the infrastructure and enormous wealth of Kock money are two different worlds.
The book provides a good start of looking at under-explored youth activism-- particularly that concerning Muslim American youth. But, again, one wishes that the book provided a deeper understanding of these case studies. For example, even though the chapter on Muslim American youth rightfully suggests a tension between older institutions like CAIR with younger groups, there are still ways in which they are overlapping as much work in Minneapolis suggests. There is a bit too much overgeneralizing occurring in the book from very limited case studies and interview samples. Nonetheless, the work is appreciated and gives us something to build upon.
October 28, 2017
Early in By Any Media Necessary, Henry Jenkins, Provost Professor of Communication, Journalism, Cinematic Arts, and Education at the University of Southern California, defines participatory politics as "that point where participatory culture meets political and civic participation, where political change is promoted through social and cultural mechanisms rather than through established political institutions, and where citizens see themselves as capable of expressing their political concerns--often through the production and circulation of media" (2). This rather lengthy quote encapsulates much of what By Any Media Necessary attempts to understand. By Any Media Necessary is about political engagement and the way millennials in particular express and articulate their political positions, but it is also about narratives, specifically the narratives we tell ourselves about millennials and their inclination toward political engagement. Jenkins and he coterie of writers argue against this tired notion that millennials are not politically active by showing what political engagement (or participation) looks like in digital spaces where fandom and niche communities organize around shared interests that may or may be overtly political. The Harry Potter Alliance, for example, parleys community interest in the Harry Potter series as a means of political activism around issues such as LGBT rights.
However, the more salient idea visible throughout By Any Media Necessary is the precariousness many of these minority communities experience when they become politically active. "Precarious" is used as a sliding signifier throughout, but in Chapter 4, Sangita Shresthova attempts to understand what participatory politics and digital citizenship look like for Muslim American youth. She writes, "The American Muslim youth we encountered were struggling to balance the benefits and risks of public expression" (183). As understood here, precarious suggests an uneven existential space where participants confront the perpetual contradictions inherent in their expressive gestures, or as Shresthova explains earlier in the chapter, it is a "balance between vibrancy and fragility, empowerment and risk, and voice and silence" (150).
Liana Gamber-Thompson's chapter on millennial Libertarians also explores the fraught, contradictory, and precarious proposition of ascribing to a libertarian dogma. According to Gamber-Thompson, many millennial Libertarians, or second-wavers, reject the efficacy of traditional electoral forms of political engagement and instead prefer focusing on education and discursive changes. The precariousness seems evident: educational and discursive reforms can produce a more reflective and self-aware populous, but we are still firmly entrenched in an electoral-based system of representation.
On the whole, I like this book even if, at times, it appears as though they are arguing against a straw man. But even as I write this, I think about conversations on cable news that frame youth activism and political engagement as one or more of the following: non-existent, repressive, or violent. Taking that into consideration, perhaps the argumentative ground from which this book pivots, is not so contrived.
However, the more salient idea visible throughout By Any Media Necessary is the precariousness many of these minority communities experience when they become politically active. "Precarious" is used as a sliding signifier throughout, but in Chapter 4, Sangita Shresthova attempts to understand what participatory politics and digital citizenship look like for Muslim American youth. She writes, "The American Muslim youth we encountered were struggling to balance the benefits and risks of public expression" (183). As understood here, precarious suggests an uneven existential space where participants confront the perpetual contradictions inherent in their expressive gestures, or as Shresthova explains earlier in the chapter, it is a "balance between vibrancy and fragility, empowerment and risk, and voice and silence" (150).
Liana Gamber-Thompson's chapter on millennial Libertarians also explores the fraught, contradictory, and precarious proposition of ascribing to a libertarian dogma. According to Gamber-Thompson, many millennial Libertarians, or second-wavers, reject the efficacy of traditional electoral forms of political engagement and instead prefer focusing on education and discursive changes. The precariousness seems evident: educational and discursive reforms can produce a more reflective and self-aware populous, but we are still firmly entrenched in an electoral-based system of representation.
On the whole, I like this book even if, at times, it appears as though they are arguing against a straw man. But even as I write this, I think about conversations on cable news that frame youth activism and political engagement as one or more of the following: non-existent, repressive, or violent. Taking that into consideration, perhaps the argumentative ground from which this book pivots, is not so contrived.
October 23, 2025
Not poorly written, but really bland. Personally feel like this narrative doesn't work for text as much as it could in a video format, as it allows you to form connections to the real people it talks about. Also doesn't help the text that the website it points you to doesn't exist anymore. But it's got a lot of good in it. I liked all of the chapters, just found the way its all written to be very repetitive and long. Definitely one that makes some good point, but the academic nature of the whole thing did rub me the wrong way.
May 19, 2017
I am a big fan of Jenkins but this book seems to be too repetitive and essayistic. It is good to see through case studies how participatory culture may actually be happening and pluralism in case selection is also a good sign. However, there is something missing about the critical edge.
May 26, 2018
AW: My co-worker and I have written a 10 lesson curriculum called Lib_101 that is an attempt at challenging our students to become better finders, evaluators and users of information. We're constantly revising it due to the ever changing landscape of 21st C information and of course, misinformation. This book reads like a doctoral thesis, I'll read it in pieces as I continue to peruse other books on related topics.
August 4, 2016
Oh No. This is a diabolically dreadful book. It offers no theorization of 'the state' or neoliberalism. Instead - once more - we're back to the young people. What are the young people wearing? What are the young people doing with their mobile phone? What are the young people doing in their zombie gear?
Dear god. Dreadful theorization of digitization. Dreadful theorization of politics. Dreadful theorization of popular culture.
And - for future noting - the world is much bigger than the United States. The US is not generalizable for the planet.
Avoid. Go play Pokemon Go.
Dear god. Dreadful theorization of digitization. Dreadful theorization of politics. Dreadful theorization of popular culture.
And - for future noting - the world is much bigger than the United States. The US is not generalizable for the planet.
Avoid. Go play Pokemon Go.
Read
January 17, 2017305.235 J524 2016
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews