Produsage KCB201 Virtual Cultures Dr Axel Bruns [email_address]
DIY Communities <ul><li>Widespread trend in media practice: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>social software, social networks </li></...
<ul><li>Decline of the traditional model of  production : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>producer    distributor    consumer </li...
<ul><li>Different production/produsage models: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Encyclop æ dia Britannica : </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><l...
Benefits of Produsage <ul><li>Advantages over conventional production: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>faster, more frequent updates...
Produsage in Context content development space set up by community or company to harbour produsage (e.g. Wikimedia Foundat...
Necessary Preconditions <ul><li>Necessary for produsage projects: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>equipotential community structures...
Key Principles <ul><li>Present in all produsage projects: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Open Participation, Communal Evaluation </...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

KCB201 Week 8 Slidecast: Produsage

986 views

Published on

Week 8 Slidecast for KCB201 Virtual Cultures in the Creative Industries Faculty at Queensland University of Technology, semester 1/2008.

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
986
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
17
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
35
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

KCB201 Week 8 Slidecast: Produsage

  1. 1. Produsage KCB201 Virtual Cultures Dr Axel Bruns [email_address]
  2. 2. DIY Communities <ul><li>Widespread trend in media practice: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>social software, social networks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 environments </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>new, collaborative forms of content creation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>across many interests and practices </li></ul></ul><ul><li>New models in media theory: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>commons-based peer production (Yochai Benkler) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>peer-to-peer (p2p) production (Michel Bauwens) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>participatory, convergence culture (Henry Jenkins) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>produsage: user -led content prod uction (see Produsage.org: Definition ) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>(Image: http://flickr.com/photos/stabilo-boss/93136022/) </li></ul>
  3. 3. <ul><li>Decline of the traditional model of production : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>producer  distributor  consumer </li></ul></ul><ul><li>(producer advised by consumer  distributor  consumer) </li></ul><ul><li>(customer-made ideas  producer  distributor  consumer) </li></ul><ul><li>Decline of the traditional concept of products : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>no fixed producer / consumer roles – everyone can be a produser </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>collaborative DIY outcomes are always temporary, never finished </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>business for community support companies is in services, not products </li></ul></ul>Beyond Production feedback
  4. 4. <ul><li>Different production/produsage models: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Encyclop æ dia Britannica : </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(once per year for the print version, more often on the Website) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wikipedia : </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(daily, hourly, or even more frequently) </li></ul></ul>Britannica vs. Wikipedia in public (as producers) produsers (as users) content content content content author editor behind closed doors
  5. 5. Benefits of Produsage <ul><li>Advantages over conventional production: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>faster, more frequent updates </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>fewer delays caused by editing and approval processes </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>improvements can be made and tested immediately </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>greater involvement of community </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>more representative of community interests </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>diverse communities more likely to find problems and identify further improvements </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>outcomes available to all </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>shared development usually means shared ownership </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Potential disadvantages: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>mistaken updates may be made available </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>potential for accidental or deliberate introduction of errors </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>community knowledge may be limited </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>need for community diversity to avoid ‘groupthink’ and blind spots </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>communities may have internal disagreements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>need for effective conflict resolution and consensus-finding mechanisms </li></ul></ul></ul>
  6. 6. Produsage in Context content development space set up by community or company to harbour produsage (e.g. Wikimedia Foundation; Google; SourceForge) commercial / non-profit harvesting of user-generated content (e.g. The Sims , Wikipedia on CD-ROM) commercial / non-profit services to support produsage (e.g. Red Hat, SourceForge) commercial activities by users themselves, harnessing the hive (e.g. support services, consultancies, content sales) initial IP contributions from individuals, the public domain, or commercial sources collaborative, iterative, evolutionary, palimpsestic user-led content development valuable, often commercial-grade content is created Produsage Environment (populated by produsers)
  7. 7. Necessary Preconditions <ul><li>Necessary for produsage projects: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>equipotential community structures </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>every participant is a potentially important contributor </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>no in-built boundaries and hierarchies: open, flat, heterarchical structures </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>probabilistic processes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>no restriction on contributors’ abilities to make a contribution </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>community itself divides constructive from disruptive contributions </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>granular tasks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>possibility of ‘random acts of participation’ </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>even from uncommitted, casual, drop-in contributors </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>shared rather than owned content </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>intended for reuse, remixing, and mash-ups </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>collaboratively developed, shared resources </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>(see Produsage.org: Necessary Preconditions ) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Key Principles <ul><li>Present in all produsage projects: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Open Participation, Communal Evaluation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>the community as a whole, if sufficiently large and varied, can contribute more than a closed team of producers, however qualified </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fluid Heterarchy, Ad Hoc Meritocracy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>produsers participate as is appropriate to their personal skills, interests, and knowledges; this changes as the produsage project proceeds </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Unfinished Artefacts, Continuing Process </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>content artefacts in produsage projects are continually under development, and therefore always unfinished; their development follows evolutionary, iterative, palimpsestic paths </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Common Property, Individual Rewards </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>contributors permit (non-commercial) community use and adaptation of their intellectual property, and are rewarded by the status capital gained through this process </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>(see Produsage.org: Key Principles ) </li></ul></ul></ul>

×