📜 Post with us on Reddit
📝 Create a new article
🏭 Create a company page
🇬🇧 - in English
🇫🇷 - en Français (FR)
🇵🇹 - em Português (PT)
🇩🇪 - in Deutsch (DE)
🇯🇵 - 日本語で (JA)
Sponsored articles

You can edit almost every page by Creating an account. Otherwise, see the FAQ.

Convergence Culture (book)

From EverybodyWiki Bios & Wiki





Convergence Culture
Author
Illustrator
LanguageEnglish
PublisherNew York University Press
Publication date
2006
Media typePrint
Pages308
ISBN978-0-8147-4295-2 Search this book on .

Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide is a book analysis written by American scholar Henry Jenkins. Published in 2006 by the New York University Press, the book conceptualizes how media and consumer behavior will evolve during the era of convergence.[1] It offers readers insight on Media Convergence, Participatory Culture, and Collective intelligence in popular culture.[2] Jenkins delivers his concepts in 6 different chapters beginning with chapters 1 and 2 examining reality television shows Survivor and American Idol.[3] Chapter 3 discusses The Matrix and its utilization of transmedia storytelling.[4] In chapters 4 and 5 he studies how franchises such as Star Wars and Harry Potter generate grassroots fan-culture and prompt companies to adopt new models of interaction.[5] Finally, chapter 6 envisions the public's utilization of convergence, focusing mostly on the 2004 presidential election.[6]

Convergence can be defined as the combination of major forms of media, IT, consumer electronics, and telecom.[7] Though the idea of convergence was not a new one when Jenkins wrote this book (dating as far back as the 1700s, with a definition more closely related to the field of science),[8] the idea of convergence culture is credited to being coined by Jenkins.[9]


Background[edit]

In 2003 Jenkins attended the New Orleans Media Experience.[10] Jenkins wanted to gain an understanding of what the future of news and media entertainment would look like, as media companies embrace the convergence paradigm.[10] While at the event, he noted that the media giants, were acknowledging that the top-down media delivery process was quickly being obscured by the wants and involvement from the bottom-up consumers.[11] Although media giants were accepting the cultural shift, they did not want to lose control or profits.[11] Released in August 2006, two months before the Youtube and Google merge, the goal of the book is to help ordinary people understand how convergence is shaping news and media entertainment.[12]

Synopsis[edit]

Introduction: Worship at the Altar of Convergence[edit]

The book starts off by discussing the Bert is Evil images made by Dino Ignacio.[13] He goes on to explain the story surrounding the images and uses it as his first example of convergence culture.[13] He discusses three different concepts over the course of the book, media convergence, participatory culture, and collective intelligence and how they interact with each other.[2] Convergence is a term that represents the culture shift in the media, media is delivered across various mediums thus allowing and encouraging consumer to participate.[14] Convergence doesn’t occur through devices but within the minds and social interactions of consumers.[15] Media convergence is where everything gets told or sold to consumers across multimedia.[15] He references the images once again showing how they moved from place to place and how the meaning changed.[15] He considered Ithiel de Sola Pool to be the prophet of media convergence who came up with the process called convergence of nodes.[16] Participatory culture is where the consumers can participate in the creation of new content.[15] He claims that not all participants are created equal, referencing corporations’ power and consumers with greater abilities than average people.[15] Collective intelligence is a term coined by Pierre Lévy where people use the knowledge and expertise of other members in a virtual setting.[17] Each person can share their own knowledge and learn knowledge from others.[17] He also talks about 2003 The New Orleans Media Experience where he first mentions the tension between Microsoft and Sony to create a black box that would get convergence culture to the people giving the companies power to control the future.[18] Delivery technologies are old media tools that get replaced by new forms of media.[19] The black box fallacy is when all media flows through a single black box.[20] He claims that people are carrying multiple black boxes instead of just one and that there will be no single black box.[21] Convergence is a top-down and bottom-up process between corporation and consumers.[11] Companies are figuring out new ways to make money while the consumers are bringing their technology under full control.[11]

Spoiling Survivor[edit]

The first chapter of Convergence Culture, recounts how an unknown user going by the alias ChillOne on a Survivor forum called Survivor Sucks was able to almost flawlessly predict outcomes on the television series that were not yet known to the public, whether through lucky guesses or alleged insider information was unknown.[22] Though the initial posts by ChillOne are no longer available, the responses to ChillOne's posts ranged from gratitude to skepticism.[23] The story of ChillOne and how the Survivor Sucks community is used to convey how interactions with media has changed.[22] This chapter also cites Pierre Levy's idea of collective intelligence, where despite no one person knowing everything, everyone knows something, therefor all knowledge resides in humanity.[24] Collective intelligence is then compared to the Survivor Sucks community, in that following ChillOne's posts, groups of people began to work together to find out if ChillOne was telling the truth, or sought to spoil the show themselves.[25] Following the idea of collective intelligence, these groups are referred to as knowledge communities. Which are groups of people who work together and combine what they each individually do know, to ultimately have a better understanding of the subject as a whole.[26] Eventually the forums gave way to gated knowledge communities, or brain trusts, where a select few members had information that they could decide on when to let the public know, resembling a more top-down distribution of knowledge.[27]

Buying into American Idol: How We are Being Sold on Reality Television[edit]

Chapter 2 discusses how American Idol was not created as just a TV show, but a transmedia franchise consisting of television broadcasting, music deals, and brand advertising in the hopes of developing a long term relationship with audiences, called "Affective Economics".[28] This chapter also suggests that advertisers are having an increasing difficulty keeping the audience engaged on a particular show long enough for the audience to watch advertisements, which in turn causes panic among advertising corporations.[29] These corporations seek to find other methods to capture the eyes of consumers whether it be through product placement during a program or putting adverts up in places other than TV.[30] By putting its logo or products in recognizable moments, brands like Coca Cola has figured out the way to make itself a big part of American Idol without needing an obvious commercial.[31] Though companies were quick to jump on the product placement strategy, the chapter also points the dangers of getting audiences emotionally invested into a show like American Idol can be for brands, as was the case in the season 2 of American Idol with the close outcome in votes between Clay Aiken and Ruben Studdard and the immense fan backlash the companies involved with the show received.[32]

Searching for the Origami Unicorn[edit]

This chapter focuses on The Matrix's capitalization of transmedia storytelling because The Matrix's story was so immense it could not be told through one medium.[33] Transmedia storytelling is the process of telling a story across different media platforms such as comics, games, merchandise, or film; with each medium adding a unique experience to the story, thus eliciting collective intelligence.[33] The Matrix used transmedia storytelling, to create a story larger than what the movies offered, with clues relating to the film's story being placed in the Matrix video-game and backstories being revealed in the form of animated shorts.[34] This chapter also brings up the idea of collaborative authorship, where multiple people from different entertainment mediums can create stories for a franchise.[35] Collaborative authorship is different than just simply having other forms of media being created for the sake of it, but rather having well-respected creators in their specific medium put their mark on the franchise's story. This idea of collaborative authorship is likened to Star Wars working with prolific animator, Genndy Tartakovsky, for a series of animated shorts, as well as Yoshiaki Kawajiri being given free reign with The Matrix franchise when creating The Animatrixas long as it took place within The Matrix universe.[35]

Quentin Tarantino's Star Wars[edit]

This chapter focuses on the dynamic between young filmmakers who are fans of Star Wars and Lucasfilm. Digital fan films are equated to the cinematic equivalent of punk subculture, with the grassroots movements operating separate from the mainstream, eventually going on to influence that mainstream as consumers begin to take media into their own hands.[36] He then goes on to make a distinction between interactivity and participation, defining the former as developments that were designed with customer feedback in mind, while defining the latter as being shaped by the protocols of culture and society.[37] The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 redefined property law to meet the demands of the mass media producers, who sent out cease and desist letters to those they felt violated their copyright, such as the creators of fan fiction, which were seen as a threat by the copyright holders.[38] Amateur filmmaking evolved from being simple home productions to public films designed to rework the mythologies they paid homage to, such as the famously ambitious Star Wars: Revelations short film.[39] After examining LucasFilm's reaction to the rise of fan fiction, such as George Lucas's attempts to halt fan erotica in the 1980s,[40] and the attempts of LucasFilm to try and direct fan fiction to an environment they could control,[41] the belief is stated that these fan works have moved well beyond their corporate points of origins. Grant McCracken believed that, unlike traditional folk stories, those who tell stories with these properties, fan-produced or not, reflect classic cultural hierarchies and that participation will have to be allowed by the corporation.[42] The chapter concludes by noting that fan and company relations are full of contradictions but states the belief that the most effective way to maintain a healthy relationship with fans is to recognize fan works, contending that fans and companies need to coexist.[43]

Why Heather Can Write[edit]

The chapter begins by saying convergence culture is causing corporations to want to control what consumers can do with literacy.[44] The main example in the chapter is the struggle Harry Potter books faced when they were released, deemed The Potter Wars.[44] The book claimed that the wars became a struggle over literacy between education and religion.[45] It starts to talk about Heather Lawver and how she launched a site called The Daily Prophet to promote literacy using the books.[46] The book said the site made children develop a richer understanding of themselves and the culture, making them full participants of convergence culture.[47] To define organic mediums created in convergence culture he mentions James Paul Gee affinity spaces.[48] It also talks about when Warner Bros bought the rights to Harry Potter and started to crack down on fan sites.[49] Then how Heather Lawver started the Defense Against the Dark Arts, after fans were threatened with legal action, the organization claimed that the fans helped make the books a best-seller.[50] After a petition, Warner Bros started to negotiate with them, and fans where happy.[51] It then starts to talk about the negative impact of participation by looking at conservative critics.[52] Some religious groups think because of the references in the books, children will be drawn towards pagan works while other groups want open-mindedness.[53] He talked about other various groups and how they are using the books to help other problems in the world.[54] The chapter concludes by saying everyone is an active participant in new media landscapes.[55]

Photoshop for Democracy[edit]

The sixth chapter focuses on the then-budding relationship between new media and politics.[56] Jenkins talks about a viral video made of clips cut out of the reality television series, The Apprentice, where then president, George W. Bush, is in an interview and assigned the task of being president.[57] After using lies to justify war, ruining the economy and spending more than the budget allows, Donald Trump finds out and proceeds to fire Bush.[58] The video serves not only as a parody of the Bush administration but also as a call to action, ending with telling the audience that while Trump cannot fire Bush, we can. This video is used as an example of what he calls "serious fun".[57] Serious fun is a way of changing the average person's relationship to politics and bringing it closer to them. It is claimed that this could lead to a shift of the idea of the informed citizen to what he calls the monitorial citizen, where collective knowledge leads way to a better understanding of politics for communities as a whole.[59] He makes the assertion that new media has a different relationship to politics than traditional broadcast media did. With new factors such as access, reciprocity, and peer-to-peer communication.[33]

Analysis[edit]

Critique on Age and Optimism[edit]

In the article Looking Back on Convergence Culture written in 2016 by Jean Burgess, professor of digital media at Queensland University of Technology, she believes that Convergence Culture is showing its age. She calls Jenkins' look at the then-current media landscape to be optimistic, stating how prominent websites like YouTube and Facebook were not even on Google's radar in the case of the former, and only a networking site for college students in the case of the latter, at the time the book was published. Burgess later claims that the idea of convergence was very prominent during the late '90s and early '00s, as it was commonly used in both media scholarship and reporting about the internet and digital media. Burgess says that during this time in the mid '00s, the idea of convergence was strongly associated with an optimistic view towards participatory culture because audiences and fans were now talking about, remixing and curating media content through the same digital markets that producers were using to market and distribute it. Burgess says that Jenkins is most famously associated with this optimistic model of convergence.[60]

Participatory Culture[edit]

Jenkins would define participatory culture in Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century as a culture in which there is a relatively low entrance into artistic expression and civic engagement.[61] Participatory culture was a prominent concept discussed in Convergence Culture. Participatory Culture was once a more niche idea, but in more recent years has become another part of mainstream culture as well. In the book YouTube: Online Video and Participatory Culture by Jean Burgess and Joshua Green, chapter 2 was originally titled YouTube and the Mainstream Media in the 2009 edition but was later updated to YouTube and the Media in 2018 because, as the book states, it no longer to makes sense to differentiate YouTube from mainstream media, because it has become mainstream media.[62] An essay by Henry Jenkins (as well as John Hartley) was removed from the updated version of the book due to the changes in the participatory culture landscape since the mid-'00s.

In Convergence Culture and the Legacy of Feminist Cultural Studies, the authors discussed the feminist legacies in the book, focusing on the term subculture and analyzing participatory culture.[63] Convergence Culture was compared to the distant past by ignoring labor and gender.[64] They claim labor and leisure can’t be in the convergence model because of the difficulties of power dynamics.[64] They say the trouble with Jenkins' sub-cultural theory’s principle is that the story is more about dedicated consumers.[65] They also discuss fan-fiction and how the Harry Potter fan-fiction writers that were mentioned were all women.[66] They claim that trans-media practices of participants are fan-fiction writers and never workers.[67]

Historical Use of Convergence & Transmedia Storytelling[edit]

In Medievalism and Convergence Culture: Researching the Middle Ages for Fiction and Film, Trigg claims recent studies of convergence culture emphasize the changing patterns of the way content circulates.[68] She says the concept is a productive one for medievalism studies and that it circulates more today than for previous generations.[68] She discusses Jonathan Alexander and media convergence says he reminds us it’s not just a technological issue.[69]

In a collection of papers titled Convergence Culture Reconsidered, under the section forms of convergence, Gorčin Dizdar argues that the idea of convergence is by no means a contemporary phenomenon and dates it at least as far back as to the renaissance art.[70] Linda Hutcheon's book, A Theory of Adaptation, is addressed in Convergence Culture Reconsidered. To add to Jenkins' idea of transmedia storytelling, Hutcheon asserts that transmedia storytelling has since become the norm and is no longer the exception like it was when Convergence Culture was published.[71] Jenkins idea of transmedia storytelling not being an adaptation, but rather self-contained entry points to a franchise that can stand on their own, but put together form a richer narrative is agreed upon by Mélanie Burdaa, who states that transmedia storytelling adds more richness to a property than cross-media adaptation because it goes beyond simply adopting the same storyline for different forms of media.[71] The idea of the lines being blurred between authors and consumers is brought up by Eckart Voigts who posits that “new reception studies will need to overcome the self-enclosure of merely thinking about audiences as consumers and start to fully grasp the fact that audiences are themselves producers, publishers, and distributors of texts.”[72] Jenkins would say, in his article “The Cultural Logic of Media Convergence", that “convergence is taking place within the same appliances…within the same franchise…within the same company…within the brain of the consumer” to which Gorčin Dizdar would use as an example of convergence dating back to renaissance art, using the painting Primavera as an example. He states that the final meaning of the painting can be found through the convergence of the painting within the brain of the consumer of the painting.[73]

Blackbox Fallacy[edit]

In his review of Convergence Culture, Ian Bogost addresses and thanks Jenkins for clarifying what Bogost refers to as an abuse of the term convergence. Bogost mentions how Jenkins blames the confusion on the term to be due to what is known as the black box fallacy, where instead of having one black box to offer all media we instead have more black boxes than ever, all competing for our attention. Bogost would go on to say that Jenkins offers a definition of media convergence that goes beyond simply a technological shift, stating that "convergence is the set of new practices that emerge out of the proliferation of media channels or technologies, and the increasing frequency with which content flows across them."[74]

More Sociology, More Culture, More Politics[edit]

In MORE SOCIOLOGY, MORE CULTURE, MORE POLITICS by Nick Couldry, Couldry proposes that the way politics are handled in various situations will change based on convergence culture and he cites Jenkins's work specifically as an example of an overly optimistic approach. The article goes on to break down the logistics of Jenkins's message in his book and how things are more complicated than just referring to the movements of new and old media as just "convergence culture" and how because of the advent of these different sectors of media colliding, the culture and politics surrounding them are rapidly changing.[75]

Rethinking Convergence/Culture[edit]

In 2011, Nick Couldry and James Hay oversaw a series of articles that sought to examine the evolution of Jenkins' concept. They argued that Jenkins' book, which focused on interactivity and grassroots media movements, was too narrow in its focus, and that the time had come to focus on the expansion of 'convergence culture studies'. The focus of the article was how media studies had evolved, and that Jenkins' ideas of convergence could apply to consumers being active in the political, economic, and government landscapes to create new brands of activism.[76]

Rethinking 'Rethinking Convergence Culture'[edit]

Jenkins responded to the article ‘Rethinking Convergence Culture’ saying he found it productive and constructive.[77] He goes on to say that his book was never intended to be the definitive guide on the convergence of media technologies, going on to say that cultural studies should remain open to new models of participatory culture. The expansion of the frameworks can allow the development of understanding the differences between the fan cultures established in the book and politically active civilians, with Jenkins highlighting examples of participatory grassroots culture such as the resistance to SOPA and the backlash to Chik-Fil-A's stance on same-sex marriage. Jenkins argues that in order for the ideas at the core of convergence to apply outside of media and into political activism is that the new media platforms and ideas that have surfaced since the publishing of his book are to expand access and broaden who is allowed to participate, allowing for debate and participation to unfold across multiple platforms without political bias.[78]

Publication[edit]

Convergence Culture was originally published in 2006 by NYU Press.[79]

Reception[edit]

Convergence Culture: Where Old And New Media Collide won the 2007 society for cinema and media studies Katherine Singer Kovacs Book Award.[80] In-depth reviews, such as the one by Dana J. Wilber of Montclair State University, claimed that the book is one that more people involved in education should read, saying that while the book is not formally about education, research, or learning, it is about the kind of learning that matters to people.[81] Nigel Sheldon wrote for the International Journal of Advertising that he thought the book managed to create an interesting dissection of media divergence by immersing in the themes of American popular culture. However, he adds that he thought the book's analysis was not thorough enough concerning how the concept of convergence affected advertising, noting how media experiences such as Second Life were already attracting advertisers.[82] In 2019, Barbara Wall wrote that the book's definition of transmedia storytelling is inclusive. However, transmedia storytelling suggests that one consumer can't understand a story and fails to help consumers navigate transmedia storytelling.[83]

Not all reviews have been positive. In an essay review by Catherine Driscoll and Melissa Gregg, they wrote that the convergence culture theory objectifies subcultures and reduces gender.[84] They also noted that the book's teaching on convergence culture is to offer insight on fan behavior to act in favor of the media industries.[84]Curt Carbonell complained that the social issues seemed "out of place" after devoting much of the book towards media rather than politics.[85]

See also[edit]

Citations[edit]

  1. ↑ Corbonell 2007, p. 732.
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 Jenkins 2006, p. 2.
  3. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 19.
  4. ↑ Jenkins 2006, pp. 20-21.
  5. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 21.
  6. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 22.
  7. ↑ Lind 2020, p. 1.
  8. ↑ Balbi 2017, pp. 31-51.
  9. ↑ Convergence Culture - Media Technology and Culture Change 2008.
  10. ↑ 10.0 10.1 Jenkins 2006, p. 6.
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 11.2 11.3 Jenkins 2006, p. 18.
  12. ↑ Mermigas 2006, p. 10.
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 Jenkins 2006, pp. 1-2.
  14. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 2-3.
  15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 Jenkins 2006, p. 3.
  16. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 10.
  17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 Jenkins 2006, p. 4.
  18. ↑ Jenkins 2006, pp. 6-10.
  19. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 13.
  20. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 14.
  21. ↑ Jenkins 2006, pp. 15-16.
  22. ↑ 22.0 22.1 Jenkins 2006, p. 26.
  23. ↑ Survivor Sucks, ChillOne's initial post 2003.
  24. ↑ Nielsen 2010.
  25. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 28.
  26. ↑ Johnsen.
  27. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 38.
  28. ↑ Jenkins 2006, pp. 61-64.
  29. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 60.
  30. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 70.
  31. ↑ Jenkins 2006, pp. 65-78.
  32. ↑ Jenkins 2006, pp. 89-92.
  33. ↑ 33.0 33.1 33.2 Jenkins 2006, p. 95.
  34. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 96.
  35. ↑ 35.0 35.1 Jenkins 2006, pp. 108-109.
  36. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 132.
  37. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 133.
  38. ↑ Jenkins 2006, pp. 137-138.
  39. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 142.
  40. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 150.
  41. ↑ Jenkins 2006, pp. 152-153.
  42. ↑ Jenkins 2006, pp. 156-157.
  43. ↑ Jenkins 2006, pp. 167-168.
  44. ↑ 44.0 44.1 Jenkins 2006, p. 175.
  45. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 176.
  46. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 178.
  47. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 185.
  48. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 177.
  49. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 194.
  50. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 195.
  51. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 196.
  52. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 201.
  53. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 203.
  54. ↑ Jenkins 2006, pp. 206-207.
  55. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 216.
  56. ↑ Jenkins 2006, p. 208.
  57. ↑ 57.0 57.1 Jenkins 2006, p. 207.
  58. ↑ Donald Trump Fires George W Bush 2007.
  59. ↑ Graeff 2019, p. 1-15.
  60. ↑ Burgess, Jean 2016.
  61. ↑ Jenkins, p. 5.
  62. ↑ Green, Burgess, Joshua, Jean 2018.
  63. ↑ Driscoll; Gregg 2011, p. 566.
  64. ↑ 64.0 64.1 Driscoll; Gregg 2011, p. 567.
  65. ↑ Driscoll; Gregg 2011, p. 569.
  66. ↑ Driscoll; Gregg 2011, p. 572.
  67. ↑ Driscoll; Gregg 2011, p. 573.
  68. ↑ 68.0 68.1 Trigg 2008, p. 100.
  69. ↑ Trigg 2008, p. 101.
  70. ↑ Glaser; Claudia 2015, p. 8.
  71. ↑ 71.0 71.1 Glaser; Claudia 2015, p. 22.
  72. ↑ Glaser; Claudia 2015, p. 25.
  73. ↑ Glaser; Claudia 2015, p. 35.
  74. ↑ Bogost 2006.
  75. ↑ Couldry 2011, p. 487-501.
  76. ↑ Hay; Couldry 2011, p. 473-485.
  77. ↑ Jenkins 2014, p. 267.
  78. ↑ Jenkins 2014, p. 267-297.
  79. ↑ Jenkins 2006.
  80. ↑ Society for Cinema and Media 2007.
  81. ↑ Wilber 2007, p. 95-98.
  82. ↑ Sheldon 2007, p. 288-289.
  83. ↑ Walls 2019, p. 2117-2118.
  84. ↑ 84.0 84.1 Driscoll 2011, p. 569.
  85. ↑ Carbonell 2007, p. 731-733.

Works cited[edit]

External links[edit]


This article "Convergence Culture (book)" is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical and/or the page Edithistory:Convergence Culture (book). Articles copied from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be seen on the Draft Namespace of Wikipedia and not main one.


Retrieved from "https://en.everybodywiki.com/index.php?title=Convergence_Culture_(book)&oldid=3098130"
License CC BY-SA 3.0
Powered by MediaWiki
Powered by Semantic MediaWiki