GAFA speaks: metaphors in the promotion of cloud technology
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-03-2016-0039 |
| Pages | 160-180 |
| Published date | 09 January 2017 |
| Date | 09 January 2017 |
| Author | Maria Lindh,Jan Michael Nolin |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science,Records management & preservation,Document management,Classification & cataloguing,Information behaviour & retrieval,Collection building & management,Scholarly communications/publishing,Information & knowledge management,Information management & governance,Information management,Information & communications technology,Internet |
GAFA speaks: metaphors in the
promotion of cloud technology
Maria Lindh and Jan Michael Nolin
Swedish School of Library and Information Science,
University of Borås, Borås, Sweden
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to explore persuasive rhetoric by critically scrutinizing metaphorical
devices utilized by leaders of the cloud industry. This paper introduces a critical approach to the promotion of
cloud technology.
Design/methodology/approach –In total, 13 video clips from YouTube were analyzed, containing
presentations and talks delivered by leaders of Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon –four of the most
influential companies within the information technology industry, sometimes referred to as GAFA. With the
help of conceptual metaphor theory, often-repeated metaphors for cloud technologies reveal what properties
were promoted and hidden.
Findings –GAFA mainly used the same persuasive metaphors to promote cloud computing’s positive
aspects. Potentially negative or complex issues were mostly avoided. Cloud technology was uniformly
described in metaphors of control, empowerment, transformation and automation. Implicitly, GAFA exerts
power through the extensive dissemination of their metaphors and these are used in order to negotiate and
overcome doubts about cloud computing and related technologies.
Originality/value –This is the first study aimed at understanding the persuasive rhetoric of GAFA, seen as
a uniform object of study.
Keywords Audiovisual media, Cloud providers, Cloud technology, Conceptual metaphor theory, GAFA,
Marketing rhetoric
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
In the last decade digital technologies have expanded to encompass cloud technology,
i.e. remote archiving and processing. This new technology is not yet domesticated or
commonly taken for granted, nor has it been fully accepted or exploited to its full potential.
Although a successive implementation of cloud technology is occurring, both in the public
sector and the private sphere, cloud providers are pushing continually for extension of both
pace and scope. Arguably, the broad ranging revelations by Edward Snowden in 2013
served as a major setback for the cloud industry. Awareness and suspicion relating to the
privacy and security of remote storing and processing heightened and was hotly debated on
a global scale. It is therefore of great concern to learn more about how cloud technology is
promulgated. The aim of this paper is to critically scrutinize metaphorical devices utilized
by leaders of the cloud industry as they argue for the extension of the pace and scope of
cloud technology implementation.
The paper examines the most influential cloud providers –represented by Google,
Amazon, Facebook and Apple, sometimes referred to as GAFA in critical discussions –by
scrutinizing their visions of an evolving cloud-based society. GAFA has been described as
“dominating the ecosystem of connective media”(van Dijck, 2013, p. 163), which also is a
good reason for exploring this chosen group. The study uncovers GAFA’s visions of
cloud technology by studying how it is propelled through marketing rhetoric.
The current study is underpinned by four assumptions. First, GAFA has a fundamental
interest in pushing visions of a future characterized by the strengthened presence of and
dependence on cloud technology. Second, to generate impact, these visions need to be
disseminated in the most popular media globally available, YouTube, which has therefore
been targeted for the empirical data collection. Third, since technological visions are
Journal of Documentation
Vol. 73 No. 1, 2017
pp. 160-180
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0022-0418
DOI 10.1108/JD-03-2016-0039
Received 30 March 2016
Revised 29 August 2016
Accepted 4 September 2016
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0022-0418.htm
160
JDOC
73,1
difficult to communicate to non-technological professionals, metaphors are used liberally.
Indeed, building on the theoretical viewpoint of Lakoff and Johnson (2003), metaphors are
used to make abstract phenomena more concrete. Fourth, metaphors of technology-rich
futures, put forward by corporations with a vested interest, should primarily be understood
as vehicles of persuasion. As such, metaphors in the current context are used to fixate
understandings of future societal outcomes. From a social science perspective, this
represents the fallacy of technological determinism.
If the metaphors of GAFA portray non-negotiable socio-technical trajectories, it is also
implied that technological development forces societal change. Technological determinism
has been thoroughly criticized by socio-technological research within science and
technology studies, where information technology (IT) is seen as both a technological and a
social construct, integral to organizations (e.g. Sturken et al., 2004). Furthermore, the study
makes use of a typology of metaphor categories, developed by Dahlbom and Janlert (1988).
The research questions are:
RQ1. Which metaphorical variations are visible in the empirical material?
RQ2. How can we understand GAFA’s visions through their metaphors?
In the following, the focus is the multi-layered technology of cloud computing. Thereafter,
theoretical and methodological aspects of studying metaphors in texts that promote new IT
are presented, as well as earlier research on IT metaphors. The main part of the paper is an
in-depth discussion of the metaphors found in the material.
2. Cloud computing as an evolving technology
Barnatt (2010) identified cloud computing’s four key features as task-centric,
dynamically scalable, device-independent and with no fixed price. Furthermore, cloud
computing is characterized by internet-based delivery of software, platform and
infrastructure services.
The broad acceptance of this new technology is a curious and interesting social
phenomenon, since organizations usually resist change (Marshall, 2010). The overt promise
of cloud technology as transformative is seductive. Organizations worldwide increasingly
invest due to competition, innovation, globalization, etc. Claims are raised of great economic
advantage and far-reaching change. Organizations may change, due to modifications in
collaboration with stakeholders, through blurring boundaries, even between work and
leisure. Furthermore, internal processes, work tasks and workforce may change (Willcocks
et al., 2014). Additionally, cloud technology is often the precondition for the development of
other evolving digital technologies, such as the “internet of things”(e.g. Hwang et al., 2013;
Wang et al., 2011) “cloud manufacturing”(e.g. Xu, 2012), “heterogeneous computing”
(e.g. Buyya et al., 2009) and “big data”(e.g. Agrawal et al., 2011).
Substantial shares of organizations’economical resources are continually placed in
IT and it is therefore critical to understand reasons for failure (e.g. Bartis and Mitev, 2008).
Furthermore, the changing business model of IT, from product to service, is crucial in the
shift to cloud (Carr, 2008). This change in the understanding of IT is often stressed –
e.g. “users do not buy technology but a capability”(Willcocks et al., 2014, p. 26). Nonetheless,
IT is often mistakenly understood as neutral. However, social constructivist research
focuses on the reciprocity between IT and organizations, i.e. how such technology is both
affected by and affects how work is executed.
Social constructivist research examines socio-technical complexities concerning new
technology and organizations (e.g. Kling, 1996; Orlikowski, 1992). Sturken et al. (2004)
discuss the lack of informed discussions on the impact of new technology in organizations.
Others indicate the interpretative flexibility of technology, since it “can and do[es] vary by
161
GAFA speaks
To continue reading
Request your trial