Campagnolo et al. (2018)
|Campagnolo et al. (2018)|
|Title:||Revolution remixed? The emergence of Open Content Film-making as a viable component within the mainstream film industry|
|Author(s):||Gian Marco Campagnolo, Evi Giannatou, Michael Franklin, James Stewart, Robin Williams|
|Citation:||Campagnolo, G.M., Giannatou, E., Franklin, M., Stewart, J., and Williams, R. (2018) Revolution remixed? The emergence of Open Content Film-making as a viable component within the mainstream film industry. Information, Communication and Society, pp1-18. ISSN 1369-118X|
|Key Related Studies:|
|About the Data|
|Data Description:||The study is the second part of a longitudinal study of open content filmmakers. Data are composed of semi-structured interviews and participant observations from several European countries. A Biography of Artefacts and Practices framework/perspective was adopted, a type of longitudinal ethnographic method.|
|Data Type:||Primary data|
|Secondary Data Sources:|
|Data Collection Methods:|
|Data Analysis Methods:|
|Cross Country Study?:||No|
|Government or policy study?:||No|
|Time Period(s) of Collection:||
“Our previous study of the Open Content Film-making (OCF) community Revolution Postponed? Tracing the development and limitations of open content filmmaking, Information, Communication & Society, (10.1080/1369118X.2018.1464590) had shown how early expectations that Creative Commons (CC) licences would enable a viable alternative to mainstream film production, comparable to free/libre open source software (FLOSS), were challenged, in particular, by the difficulties experienced in establishing viable livelihoods with OCF. A narrative of the apparent failure of OCF may be premature, however. This paper reports on a subsequent study of how OCF practices became adopted as mundane elements in a film production and distribution system that itself has been, and continues to be, dramatically changed by digitisation. These developments broke down the dichotomy that had been drawn between existing commercial practices and visions of a new system of decentralised, non-proprietary, peer production. First, we show that OCF practices are conceptualised by our informants in relation to the mainstream independent film industry. Second, we account for how OCF tools and practices become adopted within the mainstream independent film production/distribution system. These observations highlight that limiting the scope of investigation (e.g., by only undertaking short term ‘snapshot’ studies, limited to particular settings or groups) may yield flawed interpretations based on narrow viewpoints and premature judgements. Instead, we flag the need to extend research – both longitudinally and across a range of settings/viewpoints – applying methodological templates from the Biography of Artefacts and Practices perspective (Hyysalo, 2010; Pollock & Williams, 2008).”
Main Results of the Study
Open content filmmakers increasingly conceptualise openness by relating it to mainstream industry practices. For example, some filmmakers perceive Creative Commons licensing as a means of “branding” their work, effectively increasing it’s reach because of it’s openness (e.g. through volunteers translating, adapting etc.). Others strategically licence their work (e.g. Creative Commons for digital works, and all-rights-reserved for televisual works), to avoid complex collecting society systems.
The study also examines perspectives of crowdsourcing and crowdfunding, and again finds that open content filmmakers tend to evaluate openness in conjunction with the mainstream industry. Some filmmakers perceive crowdfunding as a way of protecting their integrity as independent filmmakers, ensuring that no private or government funding will compromise their neutrality. Others find the system problematic, claiming that crowdsourcing gives governments incentives to cut funding initiatives for filmmakers.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
The authors do not make any explicit policy recommendations, and instead highlight the need for further longitudinal ethnographic research, so as to produce accurate data in a changing technological landscape.