Intermediaries, mediators and digital advertising’s tensions

3Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

We argue that Latour’s distinction between ‘intermediaries’ and ‘mediators’ captures important facets of tensions in market encounters and in the co-creation of ‘supply’ and ‘demand’ within digital advertising. Drawing upon 110 interviews with 87 practitioners, participation in sector meetings and training courses, and McGowan’s ‘autoethnographic’ experiences, we explore the different forms tensions take in the two main configurations of digital advertising: (1) the ‘open marketplace,’ which is the site of much effort to turn mediators into intermediaries; and (2) ‘walled gardens,’ which increasingly are unequivocally mediators, and which are ‘de-agencing’ advertising’s human practitioners in specific ways (e.g. by making human-guided targeting less attractive and more difficult). De-agencing interacts with current initiatives, especially Apple’s, that partially ‘de-individualize’ advertising’s audiences and reinforce walled gardens’ mediator roles.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

McGowan, A., MacKenzie, D., & Caliskan, K. (2024). Intermediaries, mediators and digital advertising’s tensions. Journal of Cultural Economy, 17(5), 513–531. https://doi.org/10.1080/17530350.2024.2360919

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free