Presentacion workshop ecrea 2011

  • 478 views
Uploaded on

 

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
478
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • This is a contextual introduction related to our interests and work related to the subject. I have included the notion of ‘affective engagement’ and ‘narrative worlds’ as a wink to Jordi, as I think it constitutes a link with his current interests on cognition and ‘massive worlds’
  • This slide constitutes the canonical approach and application to crowdsourcing..
  • And the implications and problematic issues derived from this general, eminently business-oriented approach
  • Canonical approach presented visually
  • And a brief notes on actual media projects which can be considered as exponents of crowdsourcing. My goal is to point out that even that de democratising discourses of ‘Life in a day’ are fairly problematic it s not fitting in the orthodox approach, as there is a sense of reciprocity between creative core and users. Sintel (animated picture middle right) is an example of a model of crowdsourcing based on technical abilty (and supposedly closer to open source origins of the term, even if it is misleading as organization of work is fairly canonic). Star Wars Uncut (bottom left) is also transgressive as it is not oriented to problem-solving and it is empowering users through free selection of clips, peer-voting processes and non-linearity. It is also important that in Life in a day and SW Uncut, the final outcome is deeply embedded into the participation process, being in fact inextricable. Iron Sky (Isis Amelia Hjorth will be dealing specifically with this case I guess) is important for its playful and respectful relationship with audiences: even if it is task oriented there is a reciprocity in developing an open collaboration platform, Wreck a Movie. And finally, my beloved ASOA is important becasuse it was conceived at the very same moment when crowdsourcing was just becoming popular and there was a community-based, collaborative and self-reflective approach to it, surpassing by far the canon. I know, they failed.
  • This new list shows how things change after observing actual cases in media production. Canonical approach to crowdsourcing does not apply, even if it is somehow present in different features of these projects. Things are more complex, more participatory and more interesting that they seem at first sight.
  • Now I’m repeating the same structure: first orthodox definition
  • Then, issues that emerge from orthodox approach
  • A visual overview of orthodox approach
  • Cases in media production, with particular attention to Spanish cases
  • Particularities coming from observation of audiovisual projects
  • Being a mainly descriptive presentation I prefer avoiding ‘conclusions’ and including some final remarks, which includes what I consider it is our main statement and some lines of research

Transcript

  • 1. A movie by ‘you’ and ‘us’. Crowdsourcing and crowdfunding in audiovisual content production Digital Culture: Innovative Practices and Critical Theories ECREA Digital Culture and Communication 3rd Workshop (24-25th November, 2011) Antoni Roig Jordi Sánchez Navarro Talia Leibovitz Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC)/ Internet Interdisciplinary Institute (IN3)
  • 2.
    • Starting point: research on emerging creative practices and discourses related to the engagement of individuals and collectives in processes of audiovisual production.
        • Participatory forms of media production
        • Affective engagement in complex narrative worlds, media objects and production processes
        • Community-based filmmaking
        • Co-creation practices
        • Collaborative discourses on media production
        • Crowdfunding and crowdsourcing platforms
    • Specific focus of this presentation: participatory culture and the notion of the ‘crowd'
    2 Introduction: framework of research
  • 3.
    • Crowdsourcing: the ‘orthodox’ definition
    • The act of taking a job traditionally performed by a designated agent (usually an employee) and outsourcing it to an undefined, generally large group of people in the form of an open call.
    • Jeff Howe (2008)
    • Crowdsourcing: an ‘orthodox’ application to the creative industries
    • Crowdsourcing implies an evolution of outsourcing towards society and creative economy. It operates this way: companies propose a topic or problem to be solved and reward anonymous people as ‘garage scientists’, students, freelance workers or curious people, who give answer to such problem.
    • (From Wecoop, a Spanish brand-new creative crowdsourcing platform, 2011)
    3 Crowdsourcing: general approach
  • 4.
    • Task-oriented: ‘problem solving’ in specific processes (things could be done the usual way)
    • Discourses oriented to efficiency, cost, global appeal, cosmopolitanism, freshness, ‘crossumer’, the creative amateur…
    • Contribution through open calls/ ‘contests’
    • Clear cut division between ‘creative core’ and users  vertical leadership (when, what, how)
    • Members of the crowd not supposed to be aware or connected to each other (anonymous)
    4 Crowdsourcing: general approach OPEN CALLS FINAL PRODUCTS PROMOTION CREATIVE CORE EXPERTS TARGET AUDIENCE ENGAGED USERS PROCESSES/ PRODUCTS AGENTS
  • 5. 5 Crouwdsourcing: general approach
    • Closer to a ‘customer/ supplier’ relationship (‘suppliers’ as part of the audience target)
    • Experience oriented to promotional purposes (users as ‘advocates’)
    • Not participatory (no explicit recognition, no decision-making processes)
    • Motivations? Appeal to be a part of a cultural endeavour, immersion in media production, enrolment…
    OPEN CALLS FINAL PRODUCTS PROMOTION CREATIVE CORE EXPERTS TARGET AUDIENCE ENGAGED USERS PROCESSES/ PRODUCTS AGENTS
  • 6. 6 Crowdsourcing in media production
  • 7.
    • There are multiple creative practices loosely connected to the notion and discourses of crowdsourcing
    • Playful experiences
    • Motivations and rewards are equally diverse
    • Crowd experience embedded to the outcomes (things might not make sense if done the usual way)
    • Discourses on empowerment and democratisation
    • More complex organisational practices: tendency towards a (not so clear cut) division between ‘creative core’ and ‘users’
    • Participation through recognition, meritocracy and decision-making processes are possible
    • Contributions don’t necessarily shape final product
    • Rarely community-based
    7 Crowdsourcing in media production
  • 8.
    • Crowdfunding: the ‘orthodox’ definition
    • Crowdfunding refers to the collective cooperation, attention and trust by people who network and pool their money and other resources together, to support efforts initiated by other people or organizations. (Kappel, 2009)
    8 Crowdfunding: general approach
  • 9.
    • Clear distinction between creative core and users
    • Fund related, but not profit related (discourse on patronage)
    • Not everything is only about the money
    • Broadly delimited to specific milestones
    9 Crowdfunding: general approach OPEN CALLS TRADITIONAL SOURCES (loans, public funds, private investment, pre-sells, etc.) MICROFINANCING EXPERTS TARGET AUDIENCE ENGAGED USERS PROCESSES/ PRODUCTS AGENTS CREATIVE CORE INVESTORS
  • 10. 10 Crowdfunding: general approach
    • Rewards proportional to engagement
    • Members of the crowd are slightly aware of each other
    • Relationship with audiences must be cultivated.
    • Two main ways to crowdfund a project:
        • Direct (through the project website)
        • Mediated (through specialized platforms, like Kickstarter, Lanzanos, Verkami…)
    OPEN CALLS TRADITIONAL SOURCES (loans, public funds, private investment, pre-sells, etc.) MICROFINANCING EXPERTS TARGET AUDIENCE ENGAGED USERS PROCESSES/ PRODUCTS AGENTS CREATIVE CORE INVESTORS
  • 11. 11 Crowdfunding in media production
  • 12.
    • Multiple motivations for participants
    • Playful experiences
    • New roles: creative core as ‘microfinancial managers’, users as a collective of patrons
    • Creative core and users tied through a sense of reciprocity (and contractual obligations)
    • Impulse of non-mainstream projects oriented to social causes
    • Experience not embedded to the outcomes (could things have been done ‘the usual way’?)
    • Highly mediated processes through platforms (technological, legal, economic and social interaction implications)
    12 Crowdfunding in media production
  • 13.
    • Despite its wide use in collective media creation discourses, canonical approaches to ‘crowdsourcing’ and ‘crowdfunding’ fail to grasp the diversity of creative practices involved.
    • Research focus on:
      • motivations
      • participation strategies and organisational practices
      • new mediators
      • communities
      • alternative models of production and distribution?
      • new aesthetics?
    13 Concluding remarks
  • 14. Crowdquestions? [email_address] [email_address] [email_address]