Exploiting Produsers
Watching Axel Bruns talk from 2010 generated a lot of thinking for me surrounding the concept of produsage. The 4 key
principles that Bruns outlines that are vital to produsage being effective are
(1) open participation for all and communal evaluation; (2) fluid heterarchy,
the equal ability to make a worthy contribution; (3) all content and
information are unfinished artefacts and a continual process; and (4) all
information and content is common property and remains the property of the
community (Produsage 2007).
At first look most platforms for produsage (which there are
thousands) seem to be free and accessible, not intruded upon or infiltrated by
greed and follow all the above principles. But it seems that eventually this
changes as corporations, powerful groups and individuals begin to see the power
in controlling, changing and manipulating the environment that is set up to allow
for produsers to openly create and share. They want a share and this is the
point where produsage loses its true meaning and becomes another tool for business
and dominant groups to take advantage of people.
‘It
is vital that a produsage environment avoids attempts by individuals, business
and community leaders to capatalise on its content, it ‘must’ remain owned by
the community who produces it’.
Axel Bruns mentions that you would rather be Wikipedia than
Facebook. Wikipedia leaves users to create and generate content, whereas Facebook
makes changes for users without users support. Many incidents have occurred
where Facebook users have complained of changes and being bombarded with
content they never asked for. Business is having a growing impact on produsage,
taking away the value of being a producer and user. SIMS is another example,
where they charge people for content that users have created. Business is
taking advantage of produsers, what should be owned and built on by users who
create it, is being taken by business and used as a money making venture (Next.video
2010).
The value of produsage at its core is reflected in Jenkins view that information created collectively
by people through collaboration and contribution via sites like Wikipedia are a
clear example of how new knowledge can be captured by millions of people and
continually grow and evolve with the people producing and using that
information (Jenkins 2008). There is great value for all communities in
creating environments that follow the 4 principles of produsage, in allowing
everyone to have equal say and share valuable information. So how do we control
the environment for effective produsage? How do we ensure that these
environments we create are not open to exploitation?
References:
Jenkins,
H 2008, ‘Sharing notes about collective intelligence’, Confessions of an aca-fan, the official weblog of Henry Jenkins, 4
February, viewed 2 February 2014, <http://henryjenkins.org/2008/02/last_week_my_travels_took.html>.
Next.video
2010, Produsage and business: sharing
your brand with users, 17 December, viewed 2 February 2014, <http://video.nextconf.eu/video/923263/produsage-and-business-sharing>.
Produsage 2007, Produsage.org, viewed 2
February 2014, <http://produsage.org/node/11>.

Hi Michael,
ReplyDeleteAnother well written blog.
Yes businesses are endangering the freedom produsage promises and stands for and that is why producers themselves need to ensure they know they rights, even it is a written agreements or something to go by in cases of legal defense.
Cheers,
Elisabetta
Hi Michael,
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with both yourself and Elisabetta. I think we will see big changes in the future as businesses continue to control and manipulate produsage. I really liked the quote you used regarding how communities must not let businesses or individual's capitalise on content. Well done!
Regards,
Frances
Great blog Michael, you always seem to hit the nail on the head. am just trying to wrap my brain around it all, but thanks for giving me a better insight into the uses of business in produsage - i had not considered this, and it is pretty scary that these companies fly under the radar..
ReplyDelete