18 Mayer, Margit: Civic City Cahier.
1. SocialMovements in the (Post-)
Neoliberal City, London 2010, S. 42.
19 Vgl. Papanek, Victor: Design for the
Real World. Human Ecology and Social
Change, Chicago 2005.
20 Vgl. Burckhardt, Lucius: Design ist
unsichtbar. In: Blumenthal, Silvan/
Schmitz, Martin (Hg.): Design ist
unsichtbar: Entwurf, Gesellschaft
und Pädagogik, Berlin 2012.
21 Annette Geiger schreibt hierzu: »Al-
les Design ist strenggenommen ›so-
zial‹, denn die Gestaltung unserer
Dinge bewirkt nicht weniger als das
Design der Gesellschaft
atters of C
esellschaft und System
attractive enough (e.g., not user-friendly or not spread wide enough), or there is
a lack of translation competency between open source and use (e.g., installation
and adaptation for one’s own purposes of community work).
Against this background, the question arises as to what influence civic initiatives
and socialmovements can have on digitization processes and what is needed to
contribute more strongly to democratization processes in technology develop-
Melucci, Alberto (1989): Nomads of the Present. SocialMovements
and Individual Needs in Contemporary Society, Temple University
Muniz, Jr., Albert M./O’Guinn, Thomas C. (2001): «Brand Commu-
nity», in: Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 27, No. 4, S. 412-432.
Muniz, Jr., Albert M./O’Guinn, Thomas C. (2005): «Marketing Com-
munications in a World of Consumption and Brand Communi-
110 KAI-UWE HELLMANN
ties», in: Allan J. Kimmel (Hg.), Marketing Communication. New
Approaches, Technologies, and Styles, Oxford: Oxford University
Press, S. 62-85.
that practice them, the institutions that
uphold them, and the realities they bring forth within self-maintained boundaries.
Enacting discourses results in what sociologists investigate as socialmovements
– if they are spontaneous – and social organizations – if their institutionalized
practices extend beyond the life span of their members. While discourses tend
to be practiced in mutually exclusive communities, their exclusivity does not
hinder individuals from crossing their boundaries provided they satisfy the
qualifications of the discourse communities
the act of reading, decodifying, and interpreting as well
as producing signs and forms with some technique in some medium, that is, cod-
ifying in a certain way. The production of forms in these interactions, interpreta-
tions, and articulations are, in their vast majority, of the nature of codifications
and of proto-codifications of non-verbal languages, such as noises, images, visual
signs, acoustic signs, odors, gestures, facial and corporal expressions, socialmovements, clothes, costumes, cultural aspects and also the interpretation and