A) What do you understand by the words ‘produser’, ‘produsage’, and ‘intercreativity’? Are they useful in understanding collaborative creation of content online?
The term produser is a term that has come up in lectures and readings a lot in this unit so far, it basically showcases the way in which everybody who is a user on the internet is potentially a produser of content aswel. Intercreativity could be described as podusers publishing their own creative output which other produsers can then alter/add to freely as long as thier version of the output is thenstill freely available to be edited by other produsers. This "open source" principle is, for example, used by different types of software, Firefox being one of the most well-known examples. (I am actually being terribly "open-source" at the moment as I'm doing this blogging in Firefox on a Linux-PC while playing some music in Songbird, wow!)
b) p. 4 When collaborative sites have moderation functions to prevent a ‘free for all’, does this defeat the purpose?
Well, in a way, it does go against the basic principle of free-for-all podusing, but at the same time keeps the process running in a way that enables produserage (???) to last as otherwise it'd get too messy and unable to "compete" with traditional "institutional" creative conent.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The problem of moderation is really one of manners, I think. In real life, we know how to behave through thousands of years of conditioning. Certain behaviours are acceptable and others are not. We're not so good at understanding the rules on the internet. And therin lies another issue - is communication on the internet able to be critiqued by the same standards as IRL......???
ReplyDeleteIt is a matter of manners, I think, yes. The thing is, the standards of communicating differ from platform to platform (or website to website, if you like). And with websites coming and going, or at least gaining or losing popularity, you could wonder if users actually get the chance to learning how to behave over a long period of time, like we did with IRL communications. I guess moderators of a website must have their own set of ideas of what is deemed "acceptable" communication (and ofcourse all moderators of one website must all agree on these), "the users must comply to these or can F-off to another website", that sort-of seems to be the intention of websites and their moderators. (e.g. If Facebook-moderators find out you are not using your real name you get barred while Myspace doesn't even ask for a full name.) I'm trying to think of some more examples.
ReplyDeleteSickipedia, where users are expected to be as crude and politically incorrect as possible and actually get told off by other users if they are "too soft". Those standards would be unthinkable on many other websites where other rules of "what is accepted behaviour" are very different and possibly mostly based on IRL-standards. Hmmm...Not that great an example maybe, I'll try and think if I can think of any better examples and post them here if I do.