KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Yeni Medya / 2025 / Sayı: 19

Parazitik Yapay Organizma: Kısa Biçimli Video

Parasitic Artificial Organism: Short-Form Video

Doğa Çöl(İSTANBUL MEDİPOL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-8048-783X
Sayfa
440–457
Yayın Tarihi
2025-12-23
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Makale, bu analojiyi Deleuze’ün imge ve ağ kavramları, Michel Serres’in parazit felsefesi, Nick Land’in hiper-virüs kavramı gibi daha geniş kuramsal bağlamlara yerleştirir ve kısa biçimli medyanın dikkat ve nöropsikolojisi üzerine ampirik araştırmaları inceler.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:YouTube Shorts, TikTok videoları ve Instagram Reels gibi kısa biçimli hareketli imgeler, yalnızca bir izleyicinin dikkatini işgal ettiklerinde yaşayan, aksi durumda virüsler gibi ya da izleyicinin bilinçdışında gizil durumda kalan, simbiyotik parazitik yapay organizmalar olarak kavramsallaştırılabilir.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Bu makale, bu videoların yaşam benzeri davranışlar sergilediği tezini ortaya koymaktadır: yalıtılmış halde etkisizdirler, ancak konakları ya da izleyicileri enfekte etme ve bilişsel ile sosyal ağları sömürerek çoğalma kapasitesine sahiptirler.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Makale, bu analojiyi Deleuze’ün imge ve ağ kavramları, Michel Serres’in parazit felsefesi, Nick Land’in hiper-virüs kavramı gibi daha geniş kuramsal bağlamlara yerleştirir ve kısa biçimli medyanın dikkat ve nöropsikolojisi üzerine ampirik araştırmaları inceler.
🔬Tür:Teorik Makale
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:kısa biçimli video · parazitik medya · viral video

Özet

YouTube Shorts, TikTok videoları ve Instagram Reels gibi kısa biçimli hareketli imgeler, yalnızca bir izleyicinin dikkatini işgal ettiklerinde yaşayan, aksi durumda virüsler gibi ya da izleyicinin bilinçdışında gizil durumda kalan, simbiyotik parazitik yapay organizmalar olarak kavramsallaştırılabilir. Bu makale, bu videoların yaşam benzeri davranışlar sergilediği tezini ortaya koymaktadır: yalıtılmış halde etkisizdirler, ancak konakları ya da izleyicileri enfekte etme ve bilişsel ile sosyal ağları sömürerek çoğalma kapasitesine sahiptirler. Film ve medya kuramı, posthümanist felsefe ve ampirik bilimsel çalışmalardan yararlanan makale, viral videoların biyolojik virüsler veya parazitlerle nasıl paralellikler kurduğunu inceler. Tartışma, kısa biçimli bir videonun yaşam döngüsüne yöneliktir: izlenmemiş, sıfır görüntülenme durumundan, izlenme sırasında etkinleşmesine; bu aşamada konak olan izleyicinin bilişini ve davranışını etkilemesine (çoğunlukla maruz kalma sonrası bir art etki veya yankı bırakmasına) kadar. Makale, bu analojiyi Deleuze’ün imge ve ağ kavramları, Michel Serres’in parazit felsefesi, Nick Land’in hiper-virüs kavramı gibi daha geniş kuramsal bağlamlara yerleştirir ve kısa biçimli medyanın dikkat ve nöropsikolojisi üzerine ampirik araştırmaları inceler.

Abstract

Short-form moving images such as YouTube shorts, TikTok videos and Instagram reels can be conceptualized as symbiotic parasitic artificial organisms that live only when they occupy a viewer’s attention and otherwise lie dormant in status like viruses or within the unconsciousness of the viewer. This paper presents a thesis that these videos exhibit life-like behavior: inert in isolation, but capable of infecting hosts or viewers and propagating by exploiting cognitive and social networks. Drawing on film and media theory, posthumanist philosophy, and empirical scientific studies, the paper explores how viral videos parallel biological viruses or parasites. The discussion is directed towards the life-cycle of a short-form video, from its latent zero-view state to its activation during viewing, during which it affects the host’s cognition and behavior (often leaving an aftereffect or afterglow post-exposure). The paper situates this analogy in broader theoretical contexts including Deleuze’s concepts of the image and network, Michel Serres’s philosophy of the parasite, Nick Land’s concept of hypervirus and examines empirical research on attention and neuropsychology of short-form media.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Çöl, D. (2025). Parazitik Yapay Organizma: Kısa Biçimli Video. Yeni Medya, Sayı: 19, 440–457. https://doi.org/10.55609/yenimedya.1771744

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (66)

  1. Abidin, C. (2018). Internet celebrity: Understanding fame online (First edition). Emerald Publishing.
  2. ALshammari, F. L. (2024). Video-based microlearning and the impact on programming skills and technology acceptance. Journal of Education and E-Learning Research, 11(1), 155–165. https://doi.org/10.20448/jeelr.v11i1.5399
  3. Balkin, J. M. (2003). Cultural Software: A Theory of Ideology. Yale University Press.
  4. Baudrillard, J. (1993). The transparency of evil: Essays on extreme phenomena. Verso.
  5. Baudrillard, J. (2014). Screened Out (C. Turner, Trans.). Verso Books.
  6. Beaman, C. P., & Williams, T. I. (2010). Earworms (stuck song syndrome): Towards a natural history of intrusive thoughts. British Journal of Psychology (London, England: 1953), 101(Pt 4), 637–653. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712609X479636
  7. Bishop, S. (2019). Managing visibility on YouTube through algorithmic gossip. New Media & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819854731
  8. Braidotti, R. (2019). A Theoretical Framework for the Critical Posthumanities. Theory, Culture & Society, 36(6), 31–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276418771486
  9. Burgess, J., & Green, J. (2018). Youtube: Online video and participatory culture (Second edition). Polity Press.
  10. Caponnetto, P., Lanzafame, I., Prezzavento, G. C., Fakhrou, A., Lenzo, V., Sardella, A., Moussa, M. A., & Quattropani, M. C. (2025). Does TikTok Addiction exist? A qualitative study. Health Psychology Research, 13(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.52965/001c.127796
  11. Centola, D. (2010). The Spread of Behavior in an Online Social Network Experiment. Science, 329(5996), 1194–1197. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1185231
  12. Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). The chameleon effect: The perception–behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(6), 893–910. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.6.893
  13. Chen, Y., Li, M., Guo, F., & Wang, X. (2022). The effect of short-form video addiction on users’ attention. Behaviour and Information Technology. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2022.2151512
  14. Chiossi, F., Haliburton, L., Ou, C., Butz, A., & Schmidt, A. (2023). Short-Form Videos Degrade Our Capacity to Retain Intentions: Effect of Context Switching On Prospective Memory. Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3580778
  15. Cotter, K. (2019). Playing the visibility game: How digital influencers and algorithms negotiate influence on Instagram. New Media & Society, 21(4), 895–913. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818815684
  16. Coyne, S. M., Padilla-Walker, L. M., Holmgren, H. G., Davis, E. J., Collier, K. M., Memmott-Elison, M. K., & Hawkins, A. J. (2018). A meta-analysis of prosocial media on prosocial behavior, aggression, and empathic concern: A multidimensional approach. Developmental Psychology, 54(2), 331–347. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000412
  17. Craig. (2019). Social Media Entertainment. New York University Press.
  18. Deleuze, G. (1992). Postscript on the Societies of Control. October, 59, 3–7. JSTOR.
  19. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (B. Massumi, Trans.; 12. print). Univ. of Minnesota Press.
  20. Dijck, J. van. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. Oxford University Press.
  21. Dimijian, G. G. (2000). Evolving together: The biology of symbiosis, part 1. Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center), 13(3), 217–226.
  22. Gao, Y., Hu, Y., Wang, J., Liu, C., Im, H., Jin, W., Zhu, W., Ge, W., Zhao, G., Yao, Q., Wang, P., Zhang, M., Niu, X., He, Q., & Wang, Q. (2025). Neuroanatomical and functional substrates of the short video addiction and its association with brain transcriptomic and cellular architecture. NeuroImage, 307, 121029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2025.121029
  23. Gelderblom, H. R. (1996). Structure and Classification of Viruses. In S. Baron (Ed.), Medical Microbiology (4th ed.). University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK8174/
  24. Giles, H. (2016). Communication Accommodation Theory. In The International Encyclopedia of Communication Theory and Philosophy (pp. 1–7). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118766804.wbiect056
  25. Greitemeyer, T. (2022). Prosocial modeling: Person role models and the media. Current Opinion in Psychology, 44, 135–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.08.024
  26. Hayles, N. K. (2010). How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics. University of Chicago Press.
  27. Hayles, N. K. (2012). How we think: Digital media and contemporary technogenesis. The University of Chicago Press.
  28. Heyes, C. (2011). Automatic imitation. Psychological Bulletin, 137(3), 463–483. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022288
  29. Jakubowski, K., Finkel, S., Stewart, L., & Müllensiefen, D. (2017). Dissecting an earworm: Melodic features and song popularity predict involuntary musical imagery. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(2), 122–135. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000090
  30. Jenkins, H. (2009, February 11). If It Doesn’t Spread, It’s Dead (Part One): Media Viruses and Memes — Pop Junctions. Henry Jenkins. http://henryjenkins.org/blog/2009/02/if_it_doesnt_spread_its_dead_p.html
  31. Jenkins, H., Ford, S., & Green, J. (2013). Spreadable Media. NYU Press; JSTOR. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qfk6w
  32. Kaye, D. B. V., Zeng, J., & Wikström, P. (2022). TikTok: Creativity and culture in short video. Polity.
  33. Kučinskaitė-Kodzė, I., Simanavičius, M., Šimaitis, A., & Žvirblienė, A. (2021). Persistence of SARS-CoV-2-Specific Antibodies for 13 Months after Infection. Viruses, 13(11), 2313. https://doi.org/10.3390/v13112313
  34. Kvavilashvili, L., & Mandler, G. (2004). Out of one’s mind: A study of involuntary semantic memories. Cognitive Psychology, 48(1), 47–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0285(03)00115-4
  35. Land, N. (2011). Fanged Noumena: Collected writings 1987-2007 (2nd ed). Urbanomic; Sequence Press.
  36. Lessig, L. (2008). Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy. Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781849662505
  37. Li, Q., & Li, N. (2024). Social Media and Adolescents’ Prosocial Behavior: Evidence of the Interaction Between Short Videos and Social Value Orientation. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 17, 3267–3281. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S469641
  38. Li, T., Liu, H., & Liu, X. (2024). Interdisciplinary Insights into Short Video Addiction: Integrating Psychological and Brain imaging Approaches in a Comprehensive Review. Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202405.0824.v1
  39. Liikkanen, L. A. (2012). Musical activities predispose to involuntary musical imagery. Psychology of Music, 40(2), 236–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735611406578
  40. Liikkanen, L. A., & Jakubowski, K. (2020). Involuntary musical imagery as a component of ordinary music cognition: A review of empirical evidence. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 27(6), 1195–1217. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-020-01750-7
  41. Lin, B.-H., Chung, Y.-J., Cheng, H.-Y., Yen, Y.-T., Li, C.-C., & Cherng, F.-Y. (2024). Understanding the Effects of Short-Form Videos on Sustained Attention. Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1145/3613905.3651018
  42. Manovich, L. (2013). Software Takes Command. Bloomsbury Academic.
  43. McGrady, R., Zheng, K., Curran, R., Baumgartner, J., & Zuckerman, E. (2023). Dialing for Videos: A Random Sample of YouTube. Journal of Quantitative Description: Digital Media, 3. https://doi.org/10.51685/jqd.2023.022
  44. Nahon, K., & Hemsley, J. (2013). Going Viral.
  45. Paasonen, S. (2021). Dependent, distracted, bored: Affective formations in networked media. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11903.001.0001
  46. Pedrouzo, S. B., & Krynski, L. (2023). Hyperconnected: Children and adolescents on social media. The TikTok phenomenon. Archivos Argentinos De Pediatria, 121(4), e202202674. https://doi.org/10.5546/aap.2022-02674.eng
  47. Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2004). Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27(2), 169–190. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X04000056
  48. Rushkoff, D. (1996). Media virus! Hidden agendas in popular culture (Rev. and updated ed.). Ballantine Books. Sampson, T. D. (2012). Virality: Contagion Theory in the Age of Networks. University of Minnesota Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/j.ctttsp1n
  49. Schellewald, A. (2023). Understanding the popularity and affordances of TikTok through user experiences. Media, Culture & Society, 45, 016344372211445. https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437221144562
  50. Schultz, W. (2015). Neuronal Reward and Decision Signals: From Theories to Data. Physiological Reviews, 95(3), 853–951. https://doi.org/10.1152/physrev.00023.2014
  51. Serres, M. (1982). The Parasite (L. R. Schehr, Trans.). Johns Hopkins University Press.
  52. Shifman, L. (2014). Memes in digital culture. The MIT Press.
  53. Song, P. (2014). The Ice Bucket Challenge: The public sector should get ready to promptly promote the sustained development of a system of medical care for and research into rare diseases. Intractable & Rare Diseases Research, 3(3), 94–96. https://doi.org/10.5582/irdr.2014.01015
  54. Stokel-Walker, C. (2022). TikTok Wants Longer Videos—Whether You Like It or Not. Wired. https://www.wired.com/story/tiktok-wants-longer-videos-like-not/
  55. Taylor, M. W. (2014). What Is a Virus? Viruses and Man: A History of Interactions, 23–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07758-1_2
  56. Thacker, E. (2004). Biomedia. U of Minnesota Press.
  57. van Kesteren, M. T. R., de Vries, L., & Meeter, M. (2019). Seeing the past: Afterglow effects on familiarity judgments are category-specific. Learning and Memory, 26(7), 229–234. https://doi.org/10.1101/lm.048488.118
  58. Vernallis, C. (2013). Unruly media: YouTube, music video, and the new digital cinema. Oxford University Press.
  59. Vizcaíno-Verdú, A., & Abidin, C. (2022). Music Challenge Memes on TikTok: Understanding In-Group Storytelling Videos. International Journal of Communication, 16(0), 26.
  60. What Are Those? (2015, July 2). Know Your Meme. https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/what-are-those
  61. Yan, T., Su, C., Xue, W., Hu, Y., & Zhou, H. (2024). Mobile phone short video use negatively impacts attention functions: An EEG study. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 18, 1383913. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2024.1383913
  62. Zarshenas, L., Mehrabi, M., karamdar, L., Keshavarzi, M. H., & keshtkaran, Z. (2022). The effect of micro-learning on learning and self-efficacy of nursing students: An interventional study. BMC Medical Education, 22, 664. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03726-8
  63. Zeng, J., & Kaye, D. B. V. (2022). From content moderation to visibility moderation: A case study of platform governance on TikTok. Policy & Internet, 14(1), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.287
  64. Zhang, H.-Y., Wang, G.-X., Xing, Y.-Y., & Xie, M.-R. (2022). Case Report: Disseminated Cysticercosis due to Intentional Ingestion of Parasitic Worm Eggs for Weight Loss. The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 106(2), 710–713. https://doi.org/10.4269/ajtmh.21-0760
  65. Zulli, D., & Zulli, D. J. (2022). Extending the Internet meme: Conceptualizing technological mimesis and imitation publics on the TikTok platform. New Media & Society, 24(8), 1872–1890. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820983603
  66. Land, N. (2011). Fanged Noumena: Collected writings 1987-2007 (2nd ed). Urbanomic; Sequence Press.