Difference between revisions of "Lee (2012)"
m (Saved using "Save and continue" button in form) |
|||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|Source={{Source | |Source={{Source | ||
|Name of Study=Lee (2012) | |Name of Study=Lee (2012) | ||
− | |Author=Lee, D. | + | |Author=Lee, D.; |
|Title=Precarious Creativity: Changing Attitudes Towards Craft and Creativity in the British Independent Television Production Sector | |Title=Precarious Creativity: Changing Attitudes Towards Craft and Creativity in the British Independent Television Production Sector | ||
|Year=2012 | |Year=2012 | ||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
occurred in the professional values that television producers’ associate with their creative work, by focusing on ethical and professional norms within factual television production. By considering the historical and contemporary discourse of ‘craft’ within this area of creative work, the article interrogates the nature of the changes that have taken place. The wider significance of these changes is also considered, through an engagement with theoretical concerns about the place of craft within late modernity (Sennett 2006), and with debates about the changes that have taken place within the political economy of independent television production. The article’s findings have contextual significance within contemporary debates about creative work (Hesmondhalgh & Baker, 2010). Despite the celebratory policy rhetoric of the ‘creative industries’ (DCMS 1998), the transformed production environment within contemporary British television has had a detrimental effect on skills retention an development, as well as on the potential for creativity within the industry. | occurred in the professional values that television producers’ associate with their creative work, by focusing on ethical and professional norms within factual television production. By considering the historical and contemporary discourse of ‘craft’ within this area of creative work, the article interrogates the nature of the changes that have taken place. The wider significance of these changes is also considered, through an engagement with theoretical concerns about the place of craft within late modernity (Sennett 2006), and with debates about the changes that have taken place within the political economy of independent television production. The article’s findings have contextual significance within contemporary debates about creative work (Hesmondhalgh & Baker, 2010). Despite the celebratory policy rhetoric of the ‘creative industries’ (DCMS 1998), the transformed production environment within contemporary British television has had a detrimental effect on skills retention an development, as well as on the potential for creativity within the industry. | ||
|Authentic Link=http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/76879/; http://dx.doi.org/10.1386/cij.4.2.155_1 | |Authentic Link=http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/76879/; http://dx.doi.org/10.1386/cij.4.2.155_1 | ||
− | |Reference=Paterson (2001); Sennett (2006); Hesmondhalgh and Baker (2010); | + | |Reference=Paterson (2001);Sennett (2006);Hesmondhalgh and Baker (2010); |
− | |Plain Text Proposition=* The author seeks to answer the question if commercialisation decreases production quality in British TV. | + | |Plain Text Proposition=* The author seeks to answer the question if commercialisation decreases production quality in British TV.* He conducted 20 interviews of people working within the British television industry.* Individuals interviewed agreed with the statement that factual TV had become more commercialized.* Found that traditional values associated with quality were seen to be under threat and that there has been a subsequent decline in standards.* Author continued by describing how Hollywood was mitigating risk and so becoming more homogenised spurred on by policies geared toward growth.* Independent sector, according to the author, depends on the industry and workers on the independents so creativity and innovation suffer. * The independent sector has become more consolidated, commercial and less independent. |
− | * He conducted 20 interviews of people working within the British television industry. | + | |FundamentalIssue=3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors),4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) |
− | * Individuals interviewed agreed with the statement that factual TV had become more commercialized. | + | |EvidenceBasedPolicy=D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) |
− | * Found that traditional values associated with quality were seen to be under threat and that there has been a subsequent decline in standards. | ||
− | * Author continued by describing how Hollywood was mitigating risk and so becoming more homogenised spurred on by policies geared toward growth. | ||
− | * Independent sector, according to the author, depends on the industry and workers on the independents so creativity and innovation suffer. | ||
− | * The independent sector has become more consolidated, commercial and less independent. | ||
− | |FundamentalIssue=3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors), 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) | ||
− | |EvidenceBasedPolicy=D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) | ||
|Discipline=L82: Entertainment • Media, O31: Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives, O34: Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital | |Discipline=L82: Entertainment • Media, O31: Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives, O34: Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital | ||
|Intervention-Response=Vigilance is needed regarding the trend towards consolidation and commercialisation, as this appears to challenge the very principles of public service broadcasting that have been established in the United Kingdom. | |Intervention-Response=Vigilance is needed regarding the trend towards consolidation and commercialisation, as this appears to challenge the very principles of public service broadcasting that have been established in the United Kingdom. | ||
Line 35: | Line 29: | ||
|Dataset={{Dataset | |Dataset={{Dataset | ||
|Sample Size=20 | |Sample Size=20 | ||
− | |Level of Aggregation=Individual | + | |Level of Aggregation=Individual |
|Data Material Year=Not stated | |Data Material Year=Not stated | ||
}} | }} | ||
}} | }} |
Latest revision as of 15:50, 9 June 2020
Contents
Source Details
Lee (2012) | |
Title: | Precarious Creativity: Changing Attitudes Towards Craft and Creativity in the British Independent Television Production Sector |
Author(s): | Lee, D. |
Year: | 2012 |
Citation: | Lee, D. J. (2012). Precarious Creativity: Changing Attitudes Towards Craft and Creativity in the British Independent Television Production Sector. Creative Industries Journal, 4(2), 155-170 |
Link(s): | Definitive,Definitive |
Key Related Studies: | |
Discipline: | |
Linked by: | Shmatkov (2020) |
About the Data | |
Data Description: | 20 interviews of workers in the British independent television production sector(ITPS). |
Data Type: | Primary data |
Secondary Data Sources: | |
Data Collection Methods: | |
Data Analysis Methods: | |
Industry(ies): | |
Country(ies): | |
Cross Country Study?: | No |
Comparative Study?: | No |
Literature review?: | No |
Government or policy study?: | No |
Time Period(s) of Collection: |
|
Funder(s): |
Abstract
This article focuses on television workers’ attitudes towards craft and creative practice within the field of factual television production in the British independent television production sector (ITPS). Based on longitudinal qualitative research, it argues that a radical shift has occurred in the professional values that television producers’ associate with their creative work, by focusing on ethical and professional norms within factual television production. By considering the historical and contemporary discourse of ‘craft’ within this area of creative work, the article interrogates the nature of the changes that have taken place. The wider significance of these changes is also considered, through an engagement with theoretical concerns about the place of craft within late modernity (Sennett 2006), and with debates about the changes that have taken place within the political economy of independent television production. The article’s findings have contextual significance within contemporary debates about creative work (Hesmondhalgh & Baker, 2010). Despite the celebratory policy rhetoric of the ‘creative industries’ (DCMS 1998), the transformed production environment within contemporary British television has had a detrimental effect on skills retention an development, as well as on the potential for creativity within the industry.
Main Results of the Study
- The author seeks to answer the question if commercialisation decreases production quality in British TV.* He conducted 20 interviews of people working within the British television industry.* Individuals interviewed agreed with the statement that factual TV had become more commercialized.* Found that traditional values associated with quality were seen to be under threat and that there has been a subsequent decline in standards.* Author continued by describing how Hollywood was mitigating risk and so becoming more homogenised spurred on by policies geared toward growth.* Independent sector, according to the author, depends on the industry and workers on the independents so creativity and innovation suffer. * The independent sector has become more consolidated, commercial and less independent.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
Vigilance is needed regarding the trend towards consolidation and commercialisation, as this appears to challenge the very principles of public service broadcasting that have been established in the United Kingdom.
Coverage of Study
Datasets
Sample size: | 20 |
Level of aggregation: | Individual |
Period of material under study: | Not stated |