As a society, we have faced the emergence of numerous tools and frameworks to define the habits of content users and producers. It started with Alvin Toffler’s ‘prosumer’ in which he noted, ‘the emergence of a more informed, more involved consumer of goods who would need to be kept content by allowing for a greater customisability and individualisability of products’ (Toffler, 1971 ). From there we saw the growth of ‘on-demand, just-in-time production of custom-made items’ (Bruns 2005, 1), which lead on to Charles Leadbeater’s contributory notion of ‘ pro-am’ production models (Leadbeater & Miller 2004, & Bruns 2005, 1).
However, these models, as stated by Bruns, do not consider that ‘the production of ideas takes place in a collaborative, participatory environment which breaks down the boundaries between producers and consumers and instead enables all participants to be users as well as producers of information and knowledge’ (Bruns 2005, 1). What we therefore see it the crumbling of existing content production models with produsage striding to take over.
This new trend defined by Bruns as, ‘the collaborative engagement of (ideally, large) communities of participants in a shared project… (Bruns 2006, 2) where large communities of users are responsible for content production and each change is built on iterative, evolutionary development’ (Bruns 2005, 1). This represents evolutionary development in user contribution models.
Traditional models require a team of content producers to make any changes or updates, produsage can utilise any part or piece of a community to act as content developers. This effectively opens up the doors to content produced by any web 2.0 technology. Whether it be open source content production software, social networks or citizen journalism a, ‘community as a whole, if sufficiently large and varied, will be able to contribute more than a closed team of producers, however qualified’ (Bruns 2006, 3).
Some of this phenomenon can be attributed to new media platforms such as Flickr, MySpace, Facebook and Last.fm; however just as crucial is the emergence of Generation C, a new generation of users who have the skills, abilities, and above all the interest and enthusiasm to use them (Trendwatching.com 2005).
All in all what we are faced with is a hell of a lot of information, constantly updating, evolving and growing with each piece of knowledge, idea or complaint that breaks into the Web 2.0* world, (O’Reilly 2005). It has been suggested that this will eventually become a problem, with Bruns stating, ‘until we can filter through the information the produced content will have nowhere to go, causing an information overload’ (Bruns 2008, week 6). But ‘as we become more aware of how to use the available technology properly and deliberately, we will be able to sort through interesting and relevant information, focusing on particular points and sharing these with others through an online community’ (Bruns 2008, week 6).
*Web 2.0 is the business revolution in the computer industry caused by the move to the internet as platform, and an attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform. Chief among those rules is this: Build applications that harness network effects to get better the more people use them (O’Reilly, 2006).
Blessed blogging
Cheers gemini21
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
This blog provides for a good framework of understanding of produsage which is an interesting emergent phenomenon of web 2.0. It is also highly relevant to the course content in KCB201.
You have demonstrated a thorough understanding of the topic through your writing and relevant references. Because of this I would enjoy hearing more on your opinion of produsage. Do you feel it is an appropriate term? Do you think the concept could be expanded on as the Internet and other digital media evolves?
I'm glad that you highlighted the importance of the collaborative, participatory environments that are a key issue in web 2.0 and further explored the flexibility of a produsage environment in contrast to traditional models of content creation, as this is important to gain understanding. However, I feel an explanation of the defunct use of the word production would also further strengthen the entry.
On a technical level, the language was appropriate and I enjoy your style. I did feel though, the piece lacked a little cohesion as you are thrown into the topic without much of an introduction and it lacked some exposition. However, this was rectified somewhat at the end. I would also watch your use paragraphs in order to improve the readers understanding the piece. It was enjoyable however.
Post a Comment