Conclusion chapter 2

Communication processes between people are defined by a pattern of the presence and absence of their natural and mediated presences. The fact of whether natural or mediated presence is witnessed influences the way natural and mediated presences function. Natural presence is defined by being alive and being able to act. Following the work of Damasio (2000), and Riva, Waterworth and Waterworth (2004) we can distinguish between three layers of consciousness. Each layer of consciousness also uses the sense of presence to survive. The sense of presence helps to distinguish between what is real and what is not real.
But meanwhile we are developing technologies that intentionally confuse this sense of presence and affect the perception and range of action of a human being in his or her natural presence. Other ‘confusers’ like drugs, fraud and propaganda have been deconstructed, presence design has not yet been deconstructed in such a manner.

Following the work of Haraway I argue that human beings ‘enact being alive’. Technology has deeply encroached into how we ‘enact being alive’ in societies where technology is ubiquitous as it is in the North Western Hemisphere. Both in our bodies and in our minds, the discourse generated by technology has become embedded. Not only by medical and biological technologies, which are not discussed in this study, but also information and communication technologies, which affect how we ‘enact being alive’: automation and transaction technologies, social network technologies, surveillance and identification technologies have an impact on our natural and mediated presences. This cyborg identity of the human being does not take his or her humanity away. According to the UDHR every human being with reason and conscience, who acts in a spirit of brotherhood with other people, is the bearer of human rights. Debates about who the bearer of human rights may be have not (yet) entered the realm of discussion as to whether technology embedded in a body or a mind may alter this. The information and communication technologies do have an impact on human dignity, which is granted to every human being by the UDHR, and this is an area of great concern. The cyborg identity of the human being does not take his or her humanity away until proven differently.

Mediated presence poses the question of whether it is as real, whether it has the same quality as natural presence. Inspired by Benjamin I argue that the ‘aura’ of the original, of the natural presence, which has the quality of being here and now, is not to be underestimated. Natural presence is distinct from mediated presence. To understand how different it is, when and where and in what context, we need more experiences and more research on the technologies. It is clear though that through the process of attribution, synchronization and adaptation and through the process of getting used to something ‘that works’, through the development of media schemata, mediated presences can be fully accepted by people.

Witnessed presence influences natural presence and mediated presence. It can function as a catalyst. An action that is witnessed becomes a deed. That is why ‘witnessing’ is an important action in social life. Also in judicial systems witness reports play a crucial role. In the struggle for the defence of human rights, witness reports are very important. Social network technologies, like Internet, have ameliorated the practice of human rights organizations. The overall effect of new technologies for their work is still under debate since negative effects are also surfacing due to the overflow of information, and because the speed and amount of information that can be generated can also have the opposite effect to that intended. I argue that the witnessing of the presence of other people, and the being witnessed by other people, actually changes the sense of presence on all three levels. I argue that the dimension of You is as significant as the dimensions of time and place for the orchestration of an individual human being’s presence.

Presence research is a field of interdisciplinary study and takes place in different sectors of society: in the military, in the industrial and commercial realm, in science and in the arts. The European Commission has been funding a research programme on presence since 1998 with the goal of mediating natural presence, a sense of being there, more and more effectively. One of the collaborators in this programme, Wijnand IJsselsteijn, proposes that presence research, which focuses on mediated presence, is a science of trade–offs. In the trade–off, narrative structures, media technology and cognitive and emotional human features all work together to create a sense of presence. To better understand the communication process and the variety of presences in which people operate in such a process, I have made the distinction between natural, mediated and witnessed presence. Between these three kinds of presences we make trade–offs that influence how communication processes develop.

In the following chapters, 3 and 4, I will describe two networked events in which natural, mediated and witnessed presence were interwoven in several ways. By analysing moments of trade–off, by trying to deconstruct what actually happened to the sense of presence in the multiple presences that surrounded the participants, I will analyse the case studies in chapter 5 from different perspectives in order to identify particular characteristics of each presence to better understand how to orchestrate these presences in processes of social interaction.