The new cyber realm of DIY opportunities

Some of you may recognise the growing trend increasingly evident in my posts; a supportive swing towards collaborative produsage and participatory digital networking systems. These concepts are those which underpin this weeks post – here we explore the concept of DIY design enabled through online functions and tools, growing increasingly popular in the materialisation and marketing of physical products.

 

Rushkoff (cited in Bruns 2008, 387) argues “the rise of interactive media does provide us with the beginnings of new metaphors for cooperation, new faith in the power of networked activity and new evidence of our ability to participate actively in the authorship of our collective destiny”. This is elaborated by Jenkins (cited in Bruns 2008, 388) who believes “produsage and its technologies advance processes of convergence, and are involved in a range of crucial conflicts over the shape and balance of our future technological, industrial, economic, cultural, and social environments”.

 

Such evidence is seen through the publication of Australian Better Homes and Gardens Magazine (ABHG), available in online format and highly supportive of users’ collaborative participation. The lifestyle magazine itself is founded on DIY tips for any tasks related to the house, garden or kitchen, so it is to be expected that produsers are intended to use the shared information to apply in a physical sense. Operating on produsage principles, “user innovation communities…develop a collection of information and knowledge sufficient to allow for the industrial production of goods” (von Hippel 2005). With areas of the ABHG site dedicated solely to “DIY & deco” and video streamed cookery (“Cooking with Karen“), users proactively engage in a form of participatory culture where DIY design and the change of artefacts into physical products is a likely outcome. Here, produsage emerges as the vital function enabling the dissemination and far-reaching scope of collaborative intelligence we so often take for granted. Bruns agrees, reasoning “the industrial process is neither the natural nor necessarily the most productive or socially beneficial approach imaginable” (Bruns 2008, 388) for creating content and exchanging information.

 

Would there be a need for blog forums if the information being discussed wasnt relevant to the interests of participating produsers? Would there be a market for the Australian recipe magazine, Donna Hay, if readers weren’t interested in cooking, nor considered applying the recipes published to their own homecooked meals? The “style ideas” area of this website is a DIY dream, where produsers have access to user-generated styling tips for entertainment, food and drink, tabletop, lighting and celebrations to apply to industrial materialisation. Produsers access these sites to collaborate and apply shared intelligence to industrial models; this is seen through such websites as LonelyPlanet, where travellers have wide access to rich information regarding global destinations contributed at the discretion of previous travellers to the area. In this manner, interactive media and produsage enable understanding and preperation of a culture before a traveller has experienced it, informing the reader on ‘must-see spots’, ‘danger-zones’, good restaurants, cheap accomodation and social customs, allowing produsers to apply this from cyber intelligence to physical actualisation.

 

“Overall, then, because they are infused with information, even in such non-intangible, physical realms of collaborative and innovative research, design, and development, produsage may have its place” (Bruns 2008, 391). Certainly in the online magazine industry this is seen, and will continue to proliferate as growing numbers of produsers embrace the capabilities of shared intelligence in the formation of DIY ideas to material creation.

 

REFERENCES

Bruns, A. 2008. Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Jenkins, H. cited in A, Bruns. 2008. Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Rushkoff, D. cited in A. Bruns. 2008. Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

von Hippel, E. 2005. Democratizing Innovation. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Produsage – the realities of a new digital era

In the digital era in which we live, access to information is invaluable, avenues are numerous, boundaries are becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish, and networking with contacts continues to proliferate. Technological advancements have improved the functions of web 1.0 to 2.0, with a noticeable shift from web-generated content to unlimited access by any users. Web 2.0 provides internet users the ability to larger access to varieties of content, in an increasingly deregulated arena, where user contribution is enabled and encouraged. The distinct differences between web 1.0 to web 2.0 are highlighted in Carmode and Krishnamurthy’s (2008) peer reviewed online journal, “Key Differences between web 1.0 and web 2.0“. This journal nominates increased social networking, improved web site design and useability, and collaboration in content creation as key functions present in web 2.0 that were not available in the former. Increasingly, users are encouraged to participate in web contexts that exude limitless information access and deregulate ownership and content creation boundaries.

This accurately describes ‘produsage’ – a term supported by QUT professor, Axel Bruns. Bruns incorporates this onto his personal blog ‘Snurb‘, as “Relations between brands and their users continue to be affected by a traditional perspective that sees the producers and consumers of goods and services as inherently different animals. In the emerging information and knowledge economy, and especially in online contexts, this model is no longer sustainable. Instead, spearheaded by the Web 2.0 phenomenon, there is a trend towards the fusing of production and usage as a new, hybrid process of produsage (Hamburg 2009). Prosumers (consumers of produsage) are the collaborative users of content, where their contribution extends scope of research, variety of information platforms available, increases ideas networking and allows collaborative participation with fellow prosumers. Bruns theorises that 4 key principles apply in the produsage environment, regardless of the objects behind the collaborative purpose:

1. Open Participation, Communal Evaluation
2. Fluid Heterarchy, Ad Hoc Meritocracy
3. Unfinished Artefacts, Continuing Process
4. Common Property, Individual Rewards

Produsage possesses noticeable benefits – the desensitisation of content opens numerous portals for prosumers to share and contribute to discussions of interest. As shared intelligence proliferates, so too do ideas and notions, and essentially, the open participation component allows prosumers free insight to a number of thought avenues they may not have considered. This is evidenced through websites such as Delicious, where websites are bookmarked and tagged with relevant descriptive labels that any user may access and share. Futher, the ‘work of art’ nature embedded in the produsage concept means that all entries are ‘unfinished artefacts’, and may be continued upon, mistakes edited, changed, deleted, enhanced, added to and cross-referenced at any time by an author. Bruns’ concept of ‘fluid heterarchy’ in the key principles enables all users instant and unbiased collaboration abilities, where the heirarchy structure is disassembled to allow prosumers equal access rights to content.

Alternatively, however, produsage tends to eliminate barriers of authorship and content creation, drawing on Bruns’ fourth key principle, ‘common property’. In platforms where data is produced through a shared effort, ownership cannot be attributed to one creator, and editing is done at the discretion of all users. This is seen in websites such as Wikipedia, where articles that are produced may be edited or even completely deleted by other prosumers within the Wikipedia network. Information here is added according to the findings or personal beliefs of individual authors and may or may not be academically reliable. Creative Commons licenses may not be sought to copyright information that has been collaboratively produced, therefore ownership issues arise from produsage.

Essentially, web enhancement has introduced users to much-anticipated developments in web access and participation. Resultingly, advantages and disadvantages are evident from any occurrence such as this, however it is the prerogative of the prosumer whether he/she decides to take advantage of produsage benefits in web 2.0, or prefers older style systems that inhibit creative contribution, but protect ownership.