Let's Create

How people engage with and interpret media texts has changed in the last decade. Advancements in technology have put the power to create in the hands of ordinary fans. Which in turn, has lead to parodies, fan fiction, and content reviews by fans/critics of programs. This content has lead to mixed responses from the original producers. On the one hand, the original producers are pleased that their fans are enjoying the content, but at the same time, they do not want others to profit off content that they worked long and hard on. This is where the lines are blurred. How much content is fair to show for the purpose of a review or a parody? Should the people who create the original product be the only ones who are allowed to profit off the material, even if it is only a percentage of original content that is being used? In this blog I will discuss the nature of fan involvement in the creation of their own, unique content that is legally protected under Fair Use Law. Also, I will be examining how audiences have transitioned from being passive to active due to the rise of participatory culture, and how audiences hold power.

In the textbook, the idea of fans speaking for themselves was mentioned. "The range of fan activities and interpretations uncovered by Jenkins and later scholars demonstrates that fan audiences are deeply engaged in their favourite media texts. Fans often reinterpret media content and create their own cultural productions in response." (Sullivan, 2013, 193). Fans creating their own media texts have revolutionized the commercial media industry. For instance, 50 Shades of Grey began as fan fiction for Twilight. We live in a time where anyone can get involved in the creation of content due to technological advancements in the computing industry and the film industry. Also, content can be viewed almost anywhere since geographical barriers have been essentially eliminated due to the Internet. This gives fans an opportunity to create meaningful content that speaks on behalf of fans. It also allows fans to flex their creative muscles and make something worth watching.

Watch from: 0:00-1:15

Video Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1KTxxOyokA

This parody is a great example of how audiences can get involved in the creation of their own content that was inspired by a show or an event. This relates to the idea that Sullivan mentioned in the text. Fans can create their own content in response to programs they enjoy. (Sullivan, 2013, 219). Some people wonder how content like the Simpsons parody can be posted since they are using copyrighted material. Well legally, parodies are protected under the "Fair Use" section of copyright law. According to copyright.gov, for content to qualify under Fair Use they have to meet four criteria. They look at the "Purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes", "Nature of the copyrighted work", the amount used, and the effect it has on the original work. (http://www.copyright.gov). In the textbook, this is referred to as remixing. When creators take existing content and make something new out of it, it is remixing. (Sullivan, 2013, 221). In order for the criteria of Fair Use to be met, the new content should be new and distinguishable from the original work. Parodies are a great example of new content generated from original works. Even though they use copyrighted material, it should not intrude upon Fair Use as long as the copyrighted work is not overused. In the Simpsons example, it is clear that the characters need to be used in order to establish to the audience that this is what the parody is about. Also, there should be no negative effect on the original work (The Simpsons) because it is clear that it is a joke and should not be taken too seriously. Parodies allow audience involvement to shift from passive to active.

In chapter 9 of the textbook, Henry Jenkins discusses participatory culture. "Fans and other consumers are invited to actively participate in the creation and circulation of new content" (Sullivan, 2013, 219. Cited Jenkins 2006, 290).

This neat take on the popular television show "Storage Wars" is a good example of participatory culture. These individuals from Brampton mimicked and parodied the popular cast of Storage Wars. Instead of just mindlessly watching Storage Wars on television, fans are encouraged to actively engage in media due to technological advancements. One critical reason why fan made creations circulate prominently online is because fans are given the opportunity to publish their works on popular platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and of course, YouTube. YouTube has been described in the textbook as "perhaps the single most important online tool for empowering audiences in the 21st century" (Sullivan, 2013, 220). The platform has given bountiful opportunities for individuals to express their views, opinions, and display their talent. YouTube has given a voice to independent creators if they chose to use it. Plenty of people now currently live off the money they make from the videos they post. We have seen the shift from audiences following traditional media outlets such as radio and television, to people following their favourite content creators on YouTube. As a result, fan subcultures for popular YouTubers have been established. Each YouTuber with a substantial amount of followers often has a group of people who follow them and stay up to date with their content.

The two video examples I have provided in this blog resemble the idea of "User Generated Content". Napoli (2010) highlights the three criteria needed for user generated content. They are "content made publicly available over the internet, content that reflects a certain amount of creative effort, and content that is created outside of traditional professional routines and practices." (Astigarraga, I. Pavon, A. & Zuberogoitia, A. 2016). In the twenty-first century, amateur creators have been given a chance to shine. According to YouTube statistics found in the textbook, 50% of the content on YouTube is user-created (Sullivan, 2013, 221). Audiences are enjoying non-professionally made content at high levels. The aspect of having an "average joe" creating content that is available to the masses is appealing to audiences because they can relate to the average video maker more than the professional film maker. The increase in popularity for user generated content has lead to more individuals attempting to create their own content. Everyone with access to a computer and the Internet has the potential to create something amazing. More audiences are becoming producers rather than pure consumers and it is important to promote these independent content creators in order to inspire more artists in the future.


Resources:

Office, U.C (n.d). "More Information on Fair Use". Us Copyright Office. Retrieved November 30th, 2016.
From: http://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.html

Sullivan, J. (2013). Media Audiences: Effects, users, institutions and power. Sage Publications Inc., New York, NY.

Sullivan, J. (2013). Cited Jenkins 2006. Media Audiences: Effects, users, institutions and power. Sage Publications Inc., New York, NY.

Astigarraga, I. Pavon, A. & Zuberogoitia, A (2016). "Active Audience?: Interaction of young people with television and online video content." Communication and Society, 29(3), 133-147.
  

Blogging About Bar Rescue

Bar Rescue has been one of my favourite television shows for a few years now. The show follows Jon Taffer around America while he saves failing bar owners' businesses. It is always interesting seeing how these owners conduct their day-to-day operations considering the mountain of debt they have each accumulated. Some owners are just down right ridiculous. For instance, in a follow-up interview with "Paulie" from the Canyon Inn Barr & Grill, he stated that he "blamed Obama" as one of the reasons why his bar was failing. I assume this generated plenty of laughs from viewers across North America, and this is just one reason why my family enjoys this program.

An interesting point brought up in the show is Jon Taffer's ideology of the bar being the "third place" for his customers. Your house is the first "place", where you work is the second "place", and the third "place" is somewhere you spend a fair amount of your free time at.

Take a look at this bar featured in season 3 (originally named "O'banions", now it is "Sorties Tavern"). This sign is interesting when looking at the idea of the signifier and the signified highlighted in the textbook. De Saussure (2000) claims that the signifier is the "form of the sign" and the signified is "the concept the signifier represents." (Sullivan, 2013, 137). Basically, the signifier is the phyiscal form of the sign. In this instance, the physical form of the sign is the actual bar sign which reads "Sorties Tavern". According to the episode, "Sorties" is a military term for missions, and of course "Tavern" refers to a drinking establishment. However, the signified represents connotations attached to the sign. In this case, "Sorties Tavern" represents an eating/drinking establishment for military men and women to go to since the name resonates with them. Individual meanings such as companionship, relaxation, and fun all come to mind when looking at how people view bars and taverns. These connotations relate to Jon Taffer's idea of the "third place", where people frequently go for entertainment, relaxation, and/or fun. He believes that if customers make the establishment their "third place", then they will continue to return.

Warning: Profanity is used when Jon talks to moronic bar owners

(I've included a picture for an individual sign of Jon Taffer being angry)

Jon Taffer is known for how vocal he gets when dealing with failing bar owners. He will point out fairly obvious things that the owner is doing wrong (e.g, not cleaning the bar/kitchen, drinking on the job, or poor customer service) and scream at the owner for not seeing what he sees. Stuart Hall highlights three positions audiences can take when they decode media texts. These are the dominant-hegemonic position, the negotiated position, and the oppositional position. The dominant-hegemonic position is when audiences "might accept the media message exactly in terms of the code in which is was produced." (Sullivan, 2013, 142). Audiences tend to interpret what they are seeing as factual information. (Sullivan, 2013, 142). According to this position, audiences should believe that the bar owner is negligent based on how Jon presents himself and how the bar owner (Dave) reacts. Jon states that the bar is filthy and that Dave would rather play poker than help out. This is a statement backed up by the footage aired on television. Dave can not effectively defend himself because he is shouting profanities back at Jon, rather than defending how hard he works. This communicates to the audience that Dave is struggling to justify his work ethic, and that Jon's position looks correct. In the textbook, Sullivan states that "Viewers making negotiated readings of texts relate to and understand the dominant code, but also filter media content through the lens of their own individualized experiences and worldview." (Sullivan, 2013, 142). Based on this idea, I believe a "negotiated meaning" of this clip would be when audience members understand why Jon is yelling at Dave, but they also understand that they do not have proper context of the situation. For instance, Dave had been dealing with emotional problems ever since his mother died. I personally can see why people lose passion for their work after such an emotional event. The oppositional position is when audiences focus "exclusively on the connotative meanings of the signs in order to mount an ideological struggle against the message and/or its producers." (Sullivan, 2013, 142). An example of an oppositional position to a Jon Taffer rant is when audiences reject his outbursts due to their belief that they are "staged". Since this is reality TV, I understand why viewers believe that some events are planned or scripted. I personally fall into the realm of the negotiated meaning. I believe that if I knew the context during each outburst, I would understand the owner's position more often.

One great thing about Bar Rescue for my family and I is that both of my parents watch the show. My mother and I normally watch the show live, and my dad and I sometimes watch re-runs together. The family dynamic is split because my parents are divorced. Andrew M. Ledbetter discusses the different communication patterns families have in his paper "Family Communication Patterns and Communication Competence as Predictors of Online Communication Attitude: Evaluating a Dual Pathway Model". One interesting point mentioned in the paper was that "low conversation orientation families discourage talk and open expression of emotion, whereas high conversation orientation promotes mutual family discussion and decision-making." (Ledbetter, A. 2010). I feel as though my family actually fits into both categories of high and low conversation due to the parental split. When my father and I watch Bar Rescue, we rarely discuss anything. In fact, we mostly just stare at the television and wait for something to happen. This is because my father is a quiet man who uses television as his main relaxation tool. I do not believe he enjoys conversation around the television because he does not want to have to pay attention to multiple things at the same time. Therefore, most of our time spent around the television is just about watching television. In contrast to my father, my mother enjoys having conversations during Bar Rescue. Sometimes she even sends me text messages during the live show on Sunday if I am not at her house. We also discuss what is going on during the episode together and we contemplate whether or not the bar will turn into a success. I wonder what this difference boils down to. When comparing my mother and father, my mother is more social while my father is more independent. These differences are evident when I sit with either of them around the television. If my parents had stayed together, I wonder if "family television time" would include conversation or emphasize silence.

Finally, the viewing of Bar Rescue every Sunday has become a ritual for my family (more so my mother and I). The textbook states that "Ritual can simply mean your regular, habitual activities - you may make it a 'ritual' to eat your dinner in front of the television and watch the six o'clock news every evening." (Sullivan, 2013, 178). I look forward to Sunday each week because the new episode of Bar Rescue comes on at 10pm. Watching the show has definitely become a routine or "ritual" for my mother and I because we consistently watch the new episode live. Rituals tend to have a varying degree of importance to people. Personally, I think my Bar Rescue ritual is important when it comes to maintaining common interests with my mother, and occasionally my father when we watch re-runs. Rituals do not just have to revolve around religious ceremonies. Rituals are also about celebrating the little things that make life worth living.

Jon Taffer is the Gordon Ramsay of the bar industry. He screams, he gets angry, and he insults businesses and their owners. However, he teaches, he solves problems, and at the end of the day, he changes peoples lives for the better. Whether you agree with how Jon solves problems, or you are skeptical of how legitimate the show is, one clear aspect of his life is that he is a success. Watching his week-to-week bar hopping has become a unique ritual for myself and my family, and as long as he is out there changing lives, I will be watching.

References:
Ledbetter, A. (2010). Family communication patterns and communication competence as of online communication attitude: Evaluating a dual pathway model. Journal of Family Communication, 10, 99-115.
Sullivan, J. (2013). Media Audiences: Effects, users, institutions and power. Sage Publications Inc., New York, NY.
Sullivan, 2013, 137, cited De Saussure (2000)
Sullivan, 2013, 142, cited Hall, J. (1980)