People, product and property

The continuous evolution and development of the online produsage environment raises issues of product and property.

I recently discovered this fashion blog karlascloset.com, by a twenty-year-old American fashionista. Karla blogs primarily about fashion; she posts photos of her various outfits to her blog for all to see and comment on. It seems she has acquired a large number of fans and followers who like her style as much as I do. It also appears that the publicity she has gained from the popularity of her blog has resulted in interviews, magazine appearances and job opportunities. (She even got a mention in this article by The Australian).

Social media and the global connectivity of the Internet have enabled this blogger (like many others) to put herself out there; reach a vast audience; and share her thoughts, personality, creativity and style, expressed through text and images. She has constructed and presented herself as a marketable ‘product’ – a product that she reaps the benefits from.

Karla’s blog includes a clause outlining copyright laws regarding the text, site design, logos, graphics, icons and images. But what about her own personal style illustrated in her photos? Lets say that a fan of Karla’s blog hopes to achieve the same success by creating her own fashion blog. The fan has adopted Karla’s sense of style, and attempts to recreate Karla’s looks, posting photos of these outfits to her own blog. Do intellectual property laws apply to this scenario?

The Internet fosters user-led contribution. Users of products and services, as well as fans and enthusiasts, can use the Internet as a tool to share their ideas with one another (and the big businesses watching closely). Bruns says “Sharing and collaboratively improving their designs … such designs are then turned into physical objects” (Bruns 2008, 390). Such collaboration can lead to improvements in existing products and the creation of entirely new products. If a big business takes a consumer’s imput onboard and acts upon their ideas, what right does a consumer have to the original idea that he/she offered?

These new media issues have surfaced in recent times, and will become more prevalent in the future.

The Pro/Am Debate

I was sitting on the train pondering this topic, staring at the graffiti-covered walls that passed by, when I supposed that a comparison could be made between professional/amateur online content and professional/amateur art.

In this digital age, a person doesn’t require a degree to be able to contribute content to the World Wide Web; anyone with a computer and the most basic tech skills can do this. From this notion – that every Tom, Dick and Harry can post content to the Internet – derives the criticism that amateurs are destroying the credibility of the Web. It can be argued that a hierarchical system where professionals control the dissemination of information would produce a higher quality of authoritative information. Though this may be true, the capabilities of the Internet enable everybody to learn different skills, discover new interests, share information and gain knowledge. Professionals weren’t born with a degree – they began as amateurs and spent time learning before gaining qualifications in their field of interest. Interaction with the Web might even encourage an amateur to become a qualified professional.

Arists don’t need a degree to create and contribute great work to the world. Any child can put paint on paper and produce a picture that would make their mother proud. Art is fueled by creativity, passion and expression and amateur work is no less ‘art’ because the artist is not an industry professional with qualifications. The work of famous artists may indeed teach us more about techniques and art history – but just because a painting wasn’t produced by Picasso doesn’t mean there is nothing we can gain from it. The same is true for amateur online content. If approached and used correctly, amateur contributions to the Web serve a valuable purpose: to stimulate the world through sharing beliefs, opinions, perspectives, interests, knowledge, information, news, creativity, skills, and passions.

Sites based on the concept of produser-led content creation are popular platforms for amateur contributors; they enable “all participants to be users as well as producers of information and knowledge” (Bruns 2007). Such sites founded on amateur contributions that have taken off on a large scale include Wikipedia, YouTube, and blogs. In the same way that spaces where multiple graffiti artists have contributed and built upon each other’s work can be considered visually pleasing, these produser-led sites where many amateurs contribute content are mentally stimulating.

All content (whether professional or amateur) on the Internet should be approached with some degree of caution. Sometimes it is hard to distinguish between professional content and that of amateurs. And it is here where problems arise. Professional and amateur content have different uses. We must be careful not to use amateur content in the wrong way; for example, Wikipedia should not be used in context as a reliable and credible source of information. On the other hand, we must ensure to reference information from professional sources to acknowledge the author. We wouldn’t pass off any old painting as a famous Van Gogh artwork; the same should be true for online content – it should be clearly presented as either professional or amateur content.

This is just my amateur train of thought… I don’t have a professional degree yet, but does that make these blog posts that I have written of no value at all? I don’t think so. Rather, as with other amateur content, these posts are food for thought. I hope this one leaves you full.

Wikipedia and its valid place on the Web

As university students, surely everyone has used Wikipedia at some point in time – whether to find out the meaning of a term or concept, the history of an event or famous face; or to gain a basic understanding of a particular topic before conducting further specified research, possibly beginning by exploring the reference list.

Bruns (2008) describes Wikipedia as a “collaboratively created and edited online encyclopedia”. I remember when I was in the younger years in high school, I would go to the library and pull out the Encyclopaedia Britannica to get me started on a topic. Years later and Wikipedia often serves as my first port of call for constructing my knowledge base on a topic. Is this a bad thing? Does this make me any less of a student? I don’t think so.

Wikipedia is an online resource that embodies the meaning of produsage (see my previous post on produsage) – that is, “the collaborative and continuous building and extending of existing content in pursuit of further improvement” (Bruns 2007). Wikipedia is a collaborative online community, enabling “all participants to be users as well as producers of information and knowledge” (Bruns 2007); therefore fostering collective intelligence.

As university students, we are told time and time again not to reference Wikipedia as it is not a credible source of information. And more often than not, this is true. But this does not mean that we can’t use Wikipedia in the simplest form – as a basis for knowledge and understanding and to encourage further research. Wikipedia has implemented policies and guidelines for content standards, demonstraing that it is not unjustified as basic source for infromation. The most signficant of content standards are the three principal core policies – neutral point of view, verifiablity and no original research. Neutral point of view refers to a fair representation of views without bias;  verifiability means that content must be attributed to a reliable published source; no original research restricts new unpublished thoughts (see here for more details).

I have vistied Wikipedia intending to briefly peruse a topic, and an hour later have found myself absorbed, clicking through the links to other topics, lost in the wealth of interesting information on Wikipedia. Instead of criticising Wikipedia for it’s lack of credibilty amongst other things, rather, as future academics we should be assessing the positive aspects of the source – such as encouraging the discovery of new information –  and how it has a valid place on the World Wide Web. Wikipedia is a pool of information. If we use it in this manner, then it serves a valid purpose.

What’s in your citizen journalism tool belt?

Do you Twitter? It seems to me that Twitter has emerged from the shadow of Facebook to become the social media site of the moment. I hear friends raving about it; I see students procrastinating on it in the computer labs at uni; and I must admit that I enjoy reading the celebrity Twitter section in the mX newspaper. However, I am yet to participate in this activity myself, as I ponder – who would want to know what I am doing? Nevertheless, I find the concept of Twitter quite interesting. Of particular interest, is the way in which mobile devices are used to contribute to social media sites such as Twitter, which often serves as a platform for citizen journalism.

Bowman and Wills (2003, cited in Bruns 2008, 144) describe citizen journalism as “the act of a citizen, or a group of citizens, playing an active role in the process of collecting, reporting, analysing and disseminating news and information”. Modern technology such as mobile phones and the Internet enable ordinary people to capture, report and share news with others.

The trusty mobile phone has come to be used for so much more than making a phone call; it serves as a valuable tool at the disposal of citizen journalists. Significant technological advances in mobile photo and video capabilities mean that mobile phones now boast high-resolution cameras and video recorders. In addition, users can access the Internet with the latest mobile devices. In this day and age, many people own a mobile phone and carry it with them. As a result, mobile phones are often used to capture, record and share newsworthy events as they happen; via text, photos and videos uploaded to the World Wide Web – often before professional news reporters and camera crews even make it to the scene.

Using their mobile phones, ordinary citizens have captured “some of the most powerful news images”, according to Wray (2006) from the UK’s The Guardian. Wray (2006) refers to footage captured during the Asian tsunami and the terror attacks on the London Underground. More recently, major events such as the Hudson River plane crash and the Mumbai terror attacks have been reported first on Twitter (Thornton, 2009). Twitter can serve as a tool to provide people with a platform to voice their news to the world, while newsworthy images can be uploaded to TwitPic for visual aid.  Below is one of the first images of the Hudson River plane crash, that was caputured by an ordinary citizen and posted to his TwitPic page.

Increasingly, news companies are attempting to cash-in on citizen journalism. One of the most popular ways in which companies are doing so, is by creating online forums where users can contribute their news items. iReport is an online news site created by CNN. Developed around the concept of citizen journalism, the site is comprised of news gathered and submitted solely by its users. EyeMobile by CBS, is based on the same idea; mobile phone users can post videos relating to a particular news item and can send in content straight from their mobile phone via MMS or email. Mobile phone network 3 has considered the idea of creating a direct channel where users could send their newsworthy mobile media, which would be fed to television news bulletins (Wray 2006).

There are an increasing number of platforms in which ordinary people can engage in citizen journalism. Mobile devices and social media sharing sites are just a couple of tools at the disposal of citizen journalists. What’s in your citizen journalism tool belt?

Produsage and Marketing

 

Produsage. You may have heard this term being thrown around recently. Produsage is a term that has been coined to refer to a concept that has been developing and evolving over the last several years. So, what does this term mean? According to Bruns (2007), an academic who has conducted significant research on this topic, produsage refers to “the collaborative and continuous building and extending of existing content in pursuit of further improvement.” Produsage occurs based upon the framework of networked, participatory environments, where the creation of shared content breaks down the traditionally distinct roles of producers and consumers (Bruns, 2007).

 

The Internet has given rise to a diverse range of new media platforms where produsers reign. These platforms foster a “collaborative, participatory environment, which … enables all participants to be users as well as producers of information and knowledge” (Bruns, 2007). One such media platform is the blog; blogging has become a widely popular activity. Blogs can be used for a variety of purposes and they can provide anyone and everyone with a stage to voice their message.

 

Blogs can serve as an effective tool for marketing purposes. A corporation may create a blog to deliver information regarding their particular brand or product. Blogs are a salient marketing tool as they encourage dialogue and a participatory, community environment; a company website might easily deliver the same information, however, it doesn’t provide the equivalent level of personalization and interactivity as a blog. Therefore, corporations may use their blog to encourage feedback on a topic from consumers; this creates a personal, interactive experience for the consumer, making them feel valued.

 

So how does the concept of produsage relate to marketing blogs? As these blogs encourage consumer dialogue and feedback, participants have the opportunity to interact and share their experiences, thoughts and opinions on a brand or product with the wider networked community. In this interaction between consumer/corporation and consumer/consumer, participants are both users of existing information and knowledge, and producers of new content; participants are collaborating, building and extending information and knowledge regarding the product or brand (Bruns, 2007).

 

This produsage of content by consumers is highly significant to marketing professionals. Consumers are more likely to trust the experiences and opinions shared by other consumers. This serves the company positively if consumer feedback is assenting, while the company may be negatively affected by dissenting feedback. Nevertheless, produsage is an important aspect of marketing blogs; consumers’ interaction with the company’s blog can in turn forge a stronger brand relationship.