DIY – Marketing people and products

Converting artefacts into products has become commonplace in this climate of produsage, and its collaborative, open source, decentralised communites. The shake up of the traditional power paradigms of top down production has seen enormous amounts of creativity and inventiveness from everyday people marketing their businesses and services, and themselves. For example, the cameraman who has just started his own production company; the small town musician who is wanting to get his name out and the up and coming fashion designer…you get the point. This power change has also seen new innovations in hobbies and niche interests, such as the kitesurfing communities who are “sharing and collaboratively improving their designs for the aerodynamic kites they use to propel themselves through the surf; such designs are then turned into physical objects” (Bruns 2008). These produsage designs are often better than those designed by the kitesurfing industry, demonstrating the effectiveness of produsage as a working tool. This also exposes the idea that we are all creative beings and can contribute to and enhance our own niche interests and hobbies. As discussed in the tutorial, this new way of developing products changes the way we look at, and feel about these products. A broad example is the fashion and clothing industry. Back in the day, our grandmothers might have only bought a new dress for a very special occasion. Nowadays because fashion translates across the world so quickly, chain stores adapt the latest red carpet looks every few months. This product development, in turn affects the way we interact with and feel about the product. So, because fashion is so much more transient and ever-changing, we buy a lot more clothes to keep up with the latest trends. It is within this climate that sites like ebay have taken off.

One major internet news story from last week articulates exactly what we’re talking about. Clare ‘the Kings Cross bogan’ became an overnight internet sensation after she was filmed reporting a false account of a Sydney shooting involving two ‘wogs.’

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjkQSREjxH0

Now, just over a week later, she has attracted a huge following of fans from all over the world – to the extent that she now has a publicist. Marketers have latched onto the trend, putting Clare’s face on t-shirts and coffee mugs, with the catch phrase she used in her account of the shooting – ‘chk-chk boom’ among others. Clare the Kings Cross bogan has become a brand, with groups on facebook and discussions all over the internet, on twitter and news site comments. She is so famous now that Will Ferrel has said that “she’s very convincing” and could have a future in showbiz. Clare’s followers are exactly what you’d call produsers – they have produced content about Clare, posting the video on YouTube and creating Facebook fan pages among other things. The fans are also consumers because marketers are taking advantage of the brand converting the artefact into physical products. In this era of reality TV and more idiot celebrities than you can poke a stick at, this example is something we have definitely seen before. Think back to Big Brother, and how the contestants were transformed into celebrities and used to promote nightclubs, or a certain point of view, represented in their personalities. This demonstrates the broader issue that we are consuming more information now than ever before, because information now has such power, to market people and products.

The Pro/Am Divide

It seems in the information economy of today, the lines between a professional and an amateur are blurred across many industries. One of the more obvious industries this trend is having an impact on is journalism. The impact of global citizen journalism in recent years has been huge, and we have seen many citizens providing grassroots, first hand accounts on breaking news stories, such as the London bombings. This exciting new paradigm gives us all enhanced opportunities to communicate our experiences with the world, and will only make professional journalism more accountable and professional. However, as a media and communications student who is also studying public health, I find the implications on my career uncertain. I hope to find a career in health promotion, using the media to promote healthy living, and create an enhanced awareness of health issues amongst the population. However, some things I am learning in a university context, many can teach themselves; this makes me wonder whether a media and communications degree with my public health qualification is really all that impressive, when any average Joe can also blog and create awareness campaigns.

And when I think of the divide between professionals and amateurs, I wonder where I sit within that paradigm? Am I a professional or an amateur? I feel that I have an enhanced level of knowledge about the issues within my professional field, but I’m still learning and not at the level of a working professional. And what fields does this apply to? Axel Bruns discusses the issue mainly around Wikipedia and the political structures within such a produsage effort. However, I picture this divide in more of a big picture concept, applying to various careers and social structures. And does life experience count for anything? In various contexts, I think life experience is more valuable than academic knowledge. For example, in the political field, many candidates are picked for their life experiences, strength of character and values, rather than academic achievements. My father was born at the beginning of the Second World War and had a troubled childhood; he finished school at year 7. Later on in life, he became a very successful grassroots politician, who was famous for his approachability and his talent to remember his constituents’ names decades after meeting them. So, I know I’ve gone off track, but perhaps the originality and invention my father has shown in his life is parallel to the opportunities now available for amateur produsers. And, we now have endless opportunities, with the economy of information forever changing. If amateurs have the passion, then they should not be marginalised, but instead, celebrated for their contributions – as long as the interests of users of information systems are not compromised.

Commentators have made various suggestions with regard to how we can minimise the clash between professionals and amateurs within a produsage effort, as both have their place. Bruns (2008, 214) believes that professionals have an important role to play as curators of knowledge and are especially useful in the establishment of core and fundamental knowledge. He goes on to suggest that the amateurs are in favour, because a ‘trend towards an amateur is a trend toward the unfinished’ which is the way produsage works (Bruns 2008, 214) However, Bruns (2008, 218) believes that experts who refrain from participation in produsage efforts in their field are self censoring themselves out of existence.

Citizen journalism’s role in enhancing social activism

In this week’s blog, I would like to explore how the citizen journalism movement has created a new forum for social and political activism. Citizen journalism was founded by activists at a protest in 1999, which later formed the Indymedia organisation (Bruns 2008, 69). Ever since then, citizens’ voices have grown louder, as the movement continues to grow.

Bruns (2008, 69 & 71) explains that citizen journalism embodies community-based, bottom-up development, and largely exists due to the lack of alternative perspectives in the mainstream media (MSM). Citizen journalism acts as corrective body to industrial journalism and promotes “discussion, debate and deliberation in the community” (Bruns 2008, 69 & 75).

These days, citizen journalism communities are extremely sophisticated thanks to web 2.0 technologies, and I would be surprised if any well known activist organisations did not engage in some form of citizen journalism. The Oxfam website contains blogs from members all over the world, reporting on a wide range of issues from poverty to climate change. Their homepage allows the user to choose to look at news or campaigns, and the blogs button is a permanent fixture along the top bar of options. The site also has a videos section, where you can view campaigns. This kind of social activism puts pressure on the government and provides increased education for the public about global and local issues of concern.

The Body Shop Corporation is also taking advantage of the citizen journalism movement as a tool for social, political and environmental activism. On the Body Shop Activist website, there is a stream of videos and blogs on current issues of public concern. From a list of moving tags, you can select an issue and look for current activism. There are current news and updates on many issues of social relevance, including human trafficking, domestic violence, the fight to stop whaling, fair trade, poverty and indigenous issues.

Another example of citizen journalism facilitating increased social activism is Egyptian blogger, Wael Abbas, who was posting YouTube videos of torturous acts committed by Egyptian police. Fellow bloggers say his videos have been “central in the fight against police brutality” and two policemen exposed were sentenced to three years in prison (Anderson 2007). However, due to the graphic nature of the videos, YouTube suspended Wael Abbas’s account. Bloggers didn’t take long to shift the videos to other sites. Michael Moore is another example of a citizen journalist exposing issues important to the masses.  Moore’s documentary, Sicko exposes injustices within the United States health care system, and is certainly an example of citizen journalism being used to expose important human issues. Moore’s documentaries have a unique personal style, and he uses special techniques to identify himself as ‘one of the people,’ including his casual dress code, and the fact that he always seems to stick up for the underdog.

Wikipedia: the modern-day encyclopedia

Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia (is the definition really necessary?), allows us to access information and knowledge perhaps once considered beyond the wildest dreams of humanity. We can look to Wikipedia for anything and everything, and many of the masses see it as a dependable source for general information. And why wouldn’t you use it? It’s more up to date than a book, and certainly saves you money – why buy a book, when someone who has read, or even written the book has posted their knowledge on Wikipedia. And, of course, in this day and age of enhanced environmental concern, Wikipedia is not printed on trees. It is a constantly evolving source of knowledge that embodies many produsage principles, particularly communal contributions, individual rewards, equipotentiality and it’s inclusive, open network status (Bruns 2008). And, we can all see the brilliance in the evolution of knowledge, rather than starting all over again; we appreciate the flexibility it provides to constantly enhance its public service.

However, many question the credibility of Wikipedia as an academic source. This is awkward, considering we are studying Wikipedia as some kind of Holy Grail example of produsage. So, let me ask, why are open participation sources such as Wikipedia looked upon as second rate knowledge, considering most publications inevitably contain some form of bias? Wikipedia almost appears superior in its operations, compared to traditional encyclopedias, as it encapsulates “representations of knowledge” as opposed to “the current state of accepted knowledge” (Bruns 2008, 103).

It seems Wikipedia is one of the most commonly referred to examples of produsage success (in this unit). In this unit and within the university community, we greatly value the art of collective intelligence, and use it to enhance our learning experiences and stimulate discussion and the formulation of new ideas. An example is our weekly tutorial discussions, as well as our blogs, comments and so on. So, is Wikipedia the way of the future and everyone else just needs to get with the program?

Perhaps.

According to Bruns (2008, 114), Wikipedia has systems in place that exist purely to ensure contributors are not posting biased information, or pushing inappropriate agendas. And, these systems actually encourage alternative perspectives, and allows them “fair argumentative engagement” (Bruns 2008, 120). Therefore, Wikipedia demands verifiability, not truth (Bruns 2008, 114). Bruns (2008, 121) suggests that those who criticise Wikipedia’s lack of commitment to the ‘truth’ are really “engaged with a losing battle defending objectivity.”

However, our tutorial discussion stimulated some interesting ideas as to why Wikipedia is often seen as a non-legitimate source – at least within an academic discourse. Some people raised author protection concerns; Wikipedia is like a quilt made of patches from all over the world. It is massive, and larger than life, while at the same time, extremely intricate and detailed. And that’s what makes it impossible to acknowledge all authors and contributors.

Nonetheless, I love Wikipedia. It is the modern-day encyclopedia. I think it has found a significant following of people and an army of produsers, who value the concept behind it and continue to contribute to, and enhance the Wikipedia community.

The impact of produsage on brands

The purpose of this blog is to explore the produsage concept and how it has caused a shift in the way we interact with new media technologies. I would like to explore how the gradual shift to produsage production methods have affected products and brands.

Axel Bruns (2008) defines produsage as “the collaborative and continuous building and extending of existing content in pursuit of further improvement.” Bruns believes that, with regard to new media production, the concepts of producers and consumers are no longer separate entities. He implies usage is also productive, resulting in the term ‘produsage.’ The gradual shift from the producer/consumer paradigm to this new produsage phenomenon has important implications for business and creative industries. 

There are four core principles of produsage. These include:

• Open Participation, Communal Evaluation: inclusivity principle values equal opportunity to contribute to a source of collective knowledge;
• Fluid Heterarchy, Ad Hoc Meritocracy: promotes produsers contributing, using their unique knowledge and skills and allowing the level of involvement to change as the project changes;
• Unfinished Artefacts, Continuing Process: produsage projects are always evolving and are therefore, unfinished;
• Common Property, Individual Rewards: contributors’ gain recognition through social capital, and work contributed can be used for the benefit of the community (non-commerical). (Bruns 2008).

These principles apply to a variety of produsage contexts across a range of different online communities, from citizen journalism and social activism to the open source encyclopia, Wikipedia. Some of these issues will be explored in more depth in later blogs.

Although the shift to a produsage way of developing content has been gradual – it has also been profound, affecting the way we use and interact with artefacts and brands. For example, in an interview with the ABC, Axle Bruns (2008) talks about how the commercial viability of Lonely Planet has been compromised by the “rise of user-generated travel advisory websites.” Travellers are finding new ways to share and obtain information online, through “informal networks.” The power of produsage has caused Lonely Planet to “reorganise itself around improved collaborative online environments” (Bruns 2008).

Another example is the rise of Wikipedia, which has changed the way we have traditionally looked at and interacted with encyclopedias. In true produsage fashion, anyone can contribute to Wikipedia, whether the contribution is large or as small as correcting spelling – and its content is constantly evolving. A similar comparison is the Google Maps tool, as its satellite images threaten the viability of traditional maps and atlases (Bruns 2008).

Produsage has effectively revoluntionised the way we live our lives through the internet. Formerly, we had chat rooms; now, we have a plethora of social networking sites, blogs, games, fandom sites and other virtual communities. It is interesting to explore the fact that our acts of produsage include simply updating our profile status, which in turn may attract comments and stimulate further discussion.