In relation to Week 6 flip lectures: Jonathan Hutchinson radio interview and slide share & Alex Gibson lecture

Why are we looking at this example? How does it connect with what we are doing this semester?

The concepts discussed within the content provided from Seth have strong ties with crowd sourcing, a notion we are utilising to pull off our participatory events. The interviews and lectures provide an insight into all that can be gained from online communities. They show the positive outcomes that can be achieved through social media use. Gibson explains that there is a lack of awareness about how to employ the platform correctly because it is still so recent. Both lecture and interview highlight the importance of collective intelligence.

What similarities can be made between the event we are creating and the prototype?

The audience providing the concepts that drive the event, gathering feedback from audience, low level entry, generating early interest and finding an existing community to participate in the event.

Who are our participants/content co-creators? Who is our audience?

Our class mates, fellow University students, family, friends and the music community who we are approaching to take part in the event. The street passers by are the audience.
What would a pitch look like for an event? How focused would it need to be?

It would include the strong and weak points of the project, the need for flexibility to keep the project evolving, the existing community that will be approached, the ways to gather interest, the use of forums for feedback with a significant amount of time spent discussing how and the amount of time needed to gather the community.

How would we conduct early/preliminary research on the event, the topic of the event?

The use of forums, pre-existing community pages and researching similar events to investigate the tools they employed and whether or not they were successful.
How does the authorial role of the producer change compared to in legacy media productions?

They have an understanding of how social media works and communicate with both sides of the project, understand the bigger picture, be personable, be the middle person and curate the ‘prosumer’ works.
What skills are needed to encourage participation?

Organisation; gather interest early in the project, strong communication skills; be personable and continually keep in contact with audience and be realistic; create a low level of entry for the audience.

The week 5 lecture with Darius Devas and his interactive documentary Goa Hippy Tribe.

Darius’ parents were part of the generation that lived in Goa in 1960s and so that is how he accidentally came across the stories through the connections made via social media. The people that in Goa connected through Facebook and were able to reminisce about the times. It became an obvious decision to use Facebook as a central platform as Facebook started the initial interaction.

Darius felt trust was needed and utilised if he kept the project intimate, he was a child of Goa hippy tribe and there was lots of explicit material. This made the producers interested in him for the project personally. His previous experience with Lonely Planet showed him how things worked within an online environment.

Devas created a Goa hippy tribe Facebook group, all separate conversations that were happening on many different walls were being focused on a single page/thread. This allowed him to organise the reunion in Goa which gave him the opportunity to meet face-to-face for the interviews. The Facebook conversations prompted users to go through archives and uploaded photos which were later used in the doco.

Darius had previously worked with no budget on his independent feature film. But things happened so quickly when organising the project; SBS was on board, then there was funding from screen Australia and from the NSW government which helped Devas get on way to Goa to film reunion. This was a flagship project on SBS which helped them establish themselves as progressive station using different models for telling stories. Devas states that most media is moving toward smaller online projects, less crew needed, less budgets and allowing the story to lead the way.
Filming did not happen to the production schedule because the hippies didn’t want to be interviewed at specific times. This was Devas’ first seriously funded project therefore he wanted to do a good job.

Eight finger Eddie was the founder of the scene in Andjuna, the heart of the community in Goa and was one of the first to arrive. He was not at all a technical advocate, but was still present online through other people’s memories.
Each subject had a portrait filmed about them. These portraits had an overarching story. Because the Internet is all about short attention spans, this style fits in well within interactive docos. Devas claims it is a natural evolution of how people want to consume the content.

The edit and post production happened in Goa and was slowly released to the FB community. His blogs about the experience, kept the communities included if they weren’t able to make it to the reunion, so people that weren’t able to come were still able to really engage with community.

Devas discussed the limitations. The SBS version of the project was very curated in his opinion. He wasn’t allowed to film with a 5D that had just been released, despite the technology being more intimate and more flexible and therefore better for docos. Instead he had to use a big, bulky camera. He had difficulties working with designers and found it to be a very disappointing experience. He found that the content was taken and he was then excluded from discussion about the presentation. He was not happy with design and finds it very childish and not authentic to the story. He found the site itself to be very flash orientated which was old fashioned for 2011. He felt the project lost momentum with SBS because of the world cup.

The poster image took a lot of convincing, but he won and it was very successful in drawing attention.

Devas’ advice is to not lock yourself down into a model that can’t grow with the project, because things like that have their own life. He also advises to find a natural engagement, something that is a natural interest for people and to facilitate that space and those relationships.

The documentary Us Now shows the quick paced progression and positive outcomes of participatory culture, particularly on the internet and how this can benefit democracy. Director Ivo Gormley demonstrates the ease at which individuals can contribute their ideas in a way that is enjoyable and benefits others. This documentary explores ‘new’ forums and sites such as couchsurfing.org and in this sense the film is dated. Since it’s released in 2009, there have been significant changes to these systems with the introduction of new and improved sites and social media platforms that enhance participatory culture.

The much more recent week 4 reading ‘Social media as participatory culture’ by Christian Fuchs from Social media : A critical introduction critiques Henry Jenkins’ views on participatory culture. Fuchs’ explores the negative aspects of online participation such as exploitation of labor, breaching of confidentiality and highly illegal groups that form through the platforms most of which Jenkins neglects to mention in his understanding.

The documentary highlights the idea that a lot of internet users have certain areas of expertise that they take pleasure in sharing and the rest of the online community can gain from their advice. This method of imparting knowledge is based on reputation and trust and if a huge number of people contribute their thoughts on a certain topic there is a type of quality control that takes place. This concept of participation, of individuals assisting one another gives the online community a sense of empowerment as there are fewer costs involved in developing large scale platforms that were once restricted to wealthy corporations and governments.

This concept of participation challenges government structures and corporate bodies that resemble the broadcasting system in the way that one idea is shared to many, where as now there are many ideas being shared with many people and it is easy to get involved. The systems developed by the users are structured bottom up as opposed to the hierarchical framework employed by traditional institutions. This collaboration has increased dramatically now that the participation barriers have been lowered.

Large companies are also being faced with the challenge of dealing with the transparent nature of the web, they are forced to be honest with their consumers because their mistakes will be revealed if they choose to keep secrets. Those that are open minded about these shifts in business and consumer relationships and adapt their models accordingly benefit the greatest.

Political dynamics are also shifting as the current broadcast model is inappropriate for the development of policy. There is no denying the need for the government resources that support this type of participation, but it opens up the concept of individuals contributing to the way in which decisions are made through online participation. This concept is explored by Fuchs throughout the reading in the way he describes users as having the ability to contribute to the way in which they are governed.

Large corporations are described as exploiting users’ work, even if the users are promoting products in ways they enjoy through social media channels. Fuchs also critises the way Jenkins links together online fan culture as a starting point for political causes, when most of the time users are merely rationalising their time spent idolising popular culture.

Hinton and Hjorth’s chapter on ‘Participation and User Created Content’ in Understanding Social Media provides a description of the differences between UGC and UCC.

User Generated Content (UGC): Information shared on sites that may interest others. This can be as simple as the information such as a birth date on a social media profile that assists data mining.

User Created Content (UCC): Online content created by anyone that requires social, cultural or economic resources. This content is created with the intention of others engaging in it.

The concept of a produser: Producer and User.

As a two way medium, social media requires participation, although this can be culturally specific, especially when considering China’s laws regarding the internet. This has resulted in an irregular development of participation around the world due to the cultural, social and economic factors facing nations.

Audiences are being referred to as producers when they create the content themselves. Cultural theorist Henry Jenkins considered the fans to be the producers in the way that they individually interpret the content and draw their own meaning, therefore create.

The concept of Pro-Am (a professional amateur) is introduced as an individual who produces a professional standard of work (including a professional standard of quality and effort), but does not receive any monetary benefits. They’re the people that do it purely for the passion. These individuals often contribute to YouTube, a social media site that feasts on attention seeking material created by the users.

Crowd sourcing has proven useful for solving problems that a single individual is incapable of solving on their own. There have been numerous failures in this concept when individuals abuse the system for their own benefit as opposed to helping a group. Similarly, Wikipedia has been known for containing false information due to individuals taking advantage of the system, the creators believe that the site’s accuracy will improve overtime.

The concept of citizen journalism developed through a cross over between traditional news reporting and the participatory nature of social media. Citizen journalism has developed through the ease at which individuals can and are encouraged to report information. This concept was established through blogs and the frequency of individuals reporting through capturing and uploading content to YouTube instantaneously. These reports are then easily and quickly shared through social media channels. This reporting has helped with manage natural disasters by relaying information to those in need.

The citizen journalism reports are known for their amateur style which make the delivery of information more believable and ‘intimate’. This has caused a dramatic financial loss for print media due the rising popularity of this journalism style.

There are have been positive responses to the live tweeting phenomenon, although some Australian news papers have criticised the platform for allowing incorrect information to be promoted that hasn’t been written by professionals and lacks the editorial process. This style of journalism also doesn’t include professional codes of conduct and legal protection for the writers. Hinton and Hjorth relates the comments made to an online news report as similar to letters to the editor.

Online activism has been greatly influenced by the popularity of social media, the ease at which individuals are able to share an idea and organise like-minded people to assist in protesting against the issue. The internet has been known for it’s democratic freedom, but once again social media has accentuated this and encouraged easy involvement.

Smart mobs are an example of the minimum notice required to arrange a group of like-minded people to gather for a social or political purpose. The social media tools including Twitter and Facebook were utilised by intelligent youths to communicate with governments during the Arab Spring. These social media sites ‘…provide a virtual rallying point for activists’ (Hinton and Hjorth, 2013 p. 73).

Concepts such as clicktivism (supporting causes by signing online petitions or clicking ‘like’) and slacktivism (considered the lazy form of activism, doing nothing more than clicking ‘like’) are discussed in relation to these large political gatherings. Online activism is criticised for it’s tendency to simplify complicated issues and to trick the public into believing the well designed media content, seen in KONY 2012’s campaign.

I watched  We Are Legion: The Story of the Hacktivists last semester in relation to a Media Industries assignment. My group’s focus was Online Activism Creating Tangible Offline Change and through this research I discovered the incredible power of an individual’s political desire for change coupled with the correct social media tools and tactics. There are numerous cases of online activism that have successfully incited significant change.

How does this documentary alter your understanding of Internet?

This documentary consolidated that the internet has provide individuals that share similar social and political goals with a space to easily and instantaneously organise and share information to work toward their outcome. Surprising to even some of those involved, the online discussions can eventuate in offline participation.

The film also highlighted the power of many individuals sitting behind their screens, coordinating their actions to create serious impacts on huge corporations and governments. The doco showed that these individual’s collective actions cause damage. Committing these crimes online does not lessen the punishment when they’re caught.

How is social media used to create a community of people who share a similar interest and politics?

Social media is merely a tool for sharing the opinions expressed on the internet. Individuals find like-minded others on forums, blogs and other online social-sites that relate to their social and political interests. When one idea is shared with this group of like-minded individuals, it becomes easy to foster support. These supporters offer their different skills to help establish the online community. Promoting the offline event through Facebook invitations and Twitter allows up-to-date information to be instantly shared with all of those involved, allowing a well orchestrated event to take place. There are strength in numbers.

What ideas does this documentary raise in regards to designing an event that asks people to participate and become part of a community?

It is important to find individuals with similar interests to the event by sourcing them through related online spaces to gather a higher response rate. The individuals are likely to help through participation if their personal interests and goals are being met. It is important to know your audience, foster support from these individuals, communicate plans the plan for action, report the results and thank them for their contribution.

The Martin Lister week 3 reading discusses the participatory nature of content being utilised more and more frequently that has resulted in the internet being fundamental to the current media landscape.

There has been a drastic change in the structure of how media is being created and even competing with the conventional methods. There are no longer commercial bodies controlling the information we receive. It is expected of individuals to contribute their thoughts and ideas on any and every topic. It is the age of the ‘cult of public opinion’ as opposed to the ‘court of public opinion’ (Senft, 2000).

‘New media offered ‘new tools and technologies that enable consumers to archive, annotate, appropriate, and recirculate media content’, and that these tools led to ‘a range of subcultures that pro-mote Do-lt-Yourself media production’ (Jenkins, 2002).

This change in the relationship between consumers and media producers has seen some producers embrace the participatory nature for ‘an extension of their marketing power, have sought greater feedback from their fans, and have incorporated viewer generated content into their design processes’ (Lister, 2009). Others have suppressed it.

Even some computer games are built by a large number of game modders who perform the role of both a consumer and producer, whilst following strict Terms and Conditions. This free research and design of the games blur the lines between the audience and the content creators, further exemplifying the positive outcomes of user-generated content for both parties.

In the digital world, whether you’re on Facebook, Twitter or Instagram, there’s a truism that’s both uplifting and scary…”You are what you like.”

How does this documentary alter your understanding of the way you use social media?

I have developed a deeper understanding of the value of a ‘like’ and the ways in which social media producers push fans to promote products for free. Much like print advertising, I realise there is research involved in planning promotional material to be released at a specific time and in a certain way to attract the intended demographic, but I did not realise the power of Facebook and the ease at which this information is available to social media producers.

After watching the documentary I looked at some of the 900 likes on my own Facebook profile. By liking pages and certain posts, I am giving power to the promoters in exchange for being kept informed of bands playing at my favourite venues, sales happening at my favourite stores and festivals taking place in my city. Looking at the ‘suggested likes’ list on my profile, I realise Facebook knows a lot more about me than I originally thought. It knows where I live, it knows what type of music I like and what restaurants I’ve been to. As mentioned in the documentary, Facebook allows individuals like myself to create demographic profiles that are an easy and incredible marketing tool for brands.

I agree, I am what I like. I always think twice before posting certain images or comments. I am wary of the dangers of over-sharing. It is scary, but I feel unless I cut myself off completely from social media and all of the positive things it offers then I have no choice but to embrace it.

What connections can you make with the role of a Social Media Producer?

The role of a Social Media Producer has become clearer after watching employees of The Audience describe how they create the profiles that represent celebrities the way they would like to be viewed and in a way that will help them gain the most fans. The successful fan gathering technique of attaching unknown musicians with ‘famous’ online celebrities with huge preexisting fan bases is obvious, but it works.

The SMP’s admit that they research the target audience, research how they use social media and then use the audience to sell the product. The highly controlled release of content in relation to The Hunger Games: Catching Fire film and the way that affected audiences one year from the film’s release, proves the success of building the non-organic fan base that young teenagers are unaware of.

What ideas does this documentary raise in regards to the event your group is planning and the task of achieving participatory engagement?

We will need to research our audience and create a calendar of content that will be released online in the lead up to the event. I would like to take away the technique of releasing information to create the controlled ‘slow burn’ of excitement.

As we are not an established brand or celebrity that will continue to provide their audience with interesting information about gigs after the event, it is important to give the audience something back for their engagement. Although we will be relying on family and friends to start our support base, we still owe them a ‘thank you’, whether that be the finished documentary that we will share with them or a musical momento to thank them for their attendance.

Perhaps we can even adopt the idea of providing them with a reward for liking or sharing. As our funds are limited we will need to be creative with the prizes, but I think it will still be possible to foster support using this method. People love free stuff.

We may also need to attach ourselves to other successful social media individuals or brands if we can somehow relate them back to our concept. Perhaps it could be a music store, a venue like the Cherry Bar or a community radio station like PBS or RRR.