Outside of the industrialized media, or that what is seen as mass media such as tv channels and bigger news websites, so called amateur media such as vlogs on Youtube or blogs and showcases on Tumblr have gained much ground in the last ten years. According to Mayer certain social structures that are present in media production outside of mass media, such as collective ownership and the relation between producer and consumer that can be present in semi-pro youtube channels or blogs, do not always conform to the standards of the big league.[1] When we look at media producers we look at the people who control media, who are at the top of the production hierarchy according to Mayer.[2] When large, authoritative media companies start working together or are combined through business mergers, important factors such as the practice of censorship or selective news or media messages come into play. Another factor that complicates things for the new consumer is the topic of copyright. Now media conglomerates are even more standard and present then before, it is even easier for their enormous legal teams to anxiously protect every pixel or music note that came out of their portfolio. What does this mean for normal consumers who increasingly are encouraged to produce video and audio collages on the web but simultaneously can easily get entangled in unintended infringement of (digital) copyrights?
Mayer cites Larkin (2008) when he explains how infrastructures function as “institutionalized networks that facilitate the flow of goods in a wider cultural as well as physical sense”. The infrastructures are then used to “connect regimes to people via technical and cultural networks”.[3] According to Mayer the practice and use of infrastructure that facilitated media ultimately lead to the transnationalization of media production since the 1970’s that shifted from media as a public service to media as a commodity, from laborers to consumers. In this same shift, to consumers in contemporary times, there are a couple of factors that problematize the behaviour of media companies and consumers alike. As mentioned in the introduction, copyright plays an even bigger role than before. When consumers upload a new vlog they cannot simply use music from their favourite artist, because it will be taken down in a matter of hours thanks to Youtube’s automatic DMCA (Digital Medium Copyrights Act) service.[4] Although you are sometimes permitted to use copyrighted material to an extent when you comply to fair use policy, Youtube does seem to try and make automatic claims less easy in certain cases in an effort to win back the prosumer who monetize on their vlogs (and as such, so does Youtube itself).[5] Any author, or called “the creator community” as Youtube elegantly puts it, agrees to Youtube’s rules when uploading new content. In a Polygon web article from last year, Youtube’s new “Content ID” strategy is explained.[6] Instead of taking down video’s immediately, IP’s (Intellectual Property) can now opt for sharing or even completely owning the advertisement revenue a particular video is making. Before, Youtube disabled ad revenue immediately when an IP was claimed. Now you are able to claim this to be invalid without losing revenue right away.
While the subject of “original” content should not be automatically linked to ad revenue, it is now common practice that popular channels and other individuals are using Youtube’s options to add revenue to their creations. The practices of copyright are important to acknowledge in relation to creator’s revenue, since contemporary media consumers gained territory as prosumers and amateur media producers. Not all media producers seem to be operating as equals under the law, according to Mayer[7], this might be because the fine borders between consumers and producers are beginning to fade. If everyone is able to be a producer, in this monetized society it is prone to be followed by new copyrights laws and corporate versus consumer struggles. If we see Youtube as part of Mayer’s (and Larkin’s) interpretation of infrastructure[8], culture and control seem to be up for grabs to whomever can fathom and claim power on the (government) policy of media usage.
[1] Vicki Mayer (2013), ‘Making Media Production Visible’, in: Vicki Mayer (ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Media Studies, Volume II: Media Production. Blackwell Publishing. P. 3
[2] Ibid: p. 4.
[3] Ibid: p. 6.
[4] Youtube’s official copyright guidelines, URL: https://www.youtube.com/yt/copyright. Visited at 23 Dec 2016.
[5] Polygon (VOX Media), YouTube is changing the Content ID system in an effort to help creators, URL: http://www.polygon.com/2016/4/28/11531228/youtube-content-id-changes-copyright-dispute-jim-sterling. Visited at 23 Dec 2016.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Vicki Mayer (2013), ‘Making Media Production Visible’, in: Vicki Mayer (ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Media Studies, Volume II: Media Production. Blackwell Publishing. P. 7.
[8] Ibid.
No comments:
Post a Comment