The Tuesday 12:30pm class have put their collective enquiring minds together to bring these questions as the prompts for the panel next Monday (11:30am in 80.10.17).

From the Hight reading:

1. Documentary as a ‘project’ in regards to definition is becoming very broad – so, does it need to be redefined or broken up into categories? Does a taxonomy of definitions need to be created?

2. (p. 4) “The second dynamic is the appropriation by digital platforms of aspects of documentary’s discourse and aesthetics, refashioning them especially within participatory online cultures.”

How do documentary practitioners work with participatory contributions in regards to copyright and intellectual property?

And then from the Aston and Gaudenzi reading:

3. In regards to understanding the four categories of interactive documentary – How are they important independently, or should they complement each other?

4. (p.126) “..different types of i-docs demonstrates that a variety of i-docs is already established, and that each of them uses technology to create a different interactive bond between reality, the user and the artefact”

How exactly are these relationships formed using different technologies? What connections can be made between different types of i-docs in regards to how they use technology?

5. (p. 131) “He referred to the 90-0-1 principle, as cited by Jacob Neilsen (2006), which suggests that there is a participation inequality on the Internet with only 1% of people creating content, 9% editing or modifying content, and 90% viewing content without actively contributing.”

In regards to updating this evaluation – how have these statistics and practices altered with developments in social media since 2006?