Created from footage contributed by members of the public to YouTube, the 2011 Life in a Day and 2012 Britain in a Day crowdsourced documentaries show participatory media-making projects on a global and national scale. Drawing comparisons with digital storytelling projects, this article examines efforts to structure and shape the contributions to the … in a Day crowdsourcing projects as set out in guidance and tutorial materials from the producers. Such guidance and advice are critically analysed to consider the different openings and opportunities made available by the production team as they (crowd)source content. Setting out the practices and possibilities for self-representation is a point of tension that this article explores through the comments thread to one of the production team's guidance videos. This video presents a number of submission requirements, notably that contributors do not edit, and analysis of the responding comments shows how potential contributors critically challenge participation that they regard as the requesting and curating of content.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BuckinghamD.WillettR.2009, Video Cultures: Media Technology and Everyday Creativity, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
2.
BurgessJ.2006, ‘Hearing Ordinary Voices: Cultural Studies, Vernacular Creativity and Digital Storytelling’, Continuum, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 201–14.
3.
BurgessJ.GreenJ.2014, YouTube: Online Video and Participatory Culture, 2nd edn, Polity Press, Cambridge.
4.
CarpentierN.2003, ‘The BBC's Video Nation as a Participatory Media Practice: Signifying Everyday Life, Cultural Diversity and Participation in an Online Community’, International Journal of Cultural Studies, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 425–47.
5.
CarpentierN.2011, ‘The Concept of Participation: If They Have Access and Interact, Do They Really Participate?’, Communication Management Quarterly, no. 21, pp. 13–36.
6.
CouldryN.2001, ‘The Hidden Injuries of Media Power’, Journal of Consumer Culture, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 155–74.
7.
CouldryN.2008, ‘Mediatization and Mediation? Alternative Understandings of the Emergent Space of Digital Storytelling’, New Media & Society, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 373–91.
8.
CravenI.2013. ‘Sewell, Rose and the Aesthetics of Amateur Cine Fiction’, in ShandR.CravenI. (eds), Small-gauge Storytelling, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 55–82.
9.
DelwicheA.HendersonJ.J.2012, The Participatory Cultures Handbook, Routledge, London.
10.
DoveyJ.RoseM.2013, ‘“This Great Mapping of Ourselves”: New Documentary Forms Online’, in WinstonB. (ed.), The Documentary Film Book, BFI/Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp. 366–75.
11.
DreherT.2012, ‘A Partial Promise of Voice: Digital Storytelling and the Limits of Listening’, Media International Australia, vol. 142, pp. 157–66.
12.
Garde-HansenJ.2007, ‘It's Not About the Technology: Shifting Paradigms of History in the BBC's Capture Wales Project’, The International Journal of Digital Media and Arts, vol. 4, no. 1, http://idmaa.org/?post_type=journalarticle&p=538
13.
GaudenziS.2013, ‘The Living Documentary: From Representing Reality to Co-creating Reality in Digital Interactive Documentary’, PhD thesis, Goldsmiths, University of London, http://research.gold.ac.uk/7997
HartleyJ.McWilliamK.2009, Story Circle: Digital Storytelling Around the World, Blackwell, Oxford.
17.
HermesJ.2009, ‘Audience Studies 2.0: On the Theory, Politics and Method of Qualitative Audience Research’, Interactions: Studies in Communication and Culture, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 111–27.
JenkinsH.CarpentierN.2013, ‘Theorizing Participatory Intensities: A Conversation About Participation and Politics’, Convergence, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 265–86.
LundbyK.2008, ‘Introduction: Digital Storytelling, Mediatized Stories’, in LundbyK. (ed.), Digital Storytelling, Mediatized Stories, Peter Lang, Oxford, pp. 1–17.
22.
MaddenA.RuthvenI.McMenemyD.2013, ‘A Classification Scheme for Content Analyses of YouTube Video Comments’, Journal of Documentation, vol. 69, no. 5, pp. 693–714.
23.
MeadowsD.KiddJ.2009, ‘Capture Wales: The BBC Digital Storytelling Project’, in HartleyJ.McWilliamK. (eds), Story Circle: Digital Storytelling Around the World, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 91–117.
MullerE.2009, ‘Where Quality Matters: Discourses on the Art of Making a YouTube Video’, in SnickersP.VonderauP. (eds), The YouTube Reader, National Library of Sweden, Stockholm, pp. 126–39.
RoseM.2007, ‘Video Nation and Digital Storytelling: A BBC/Public Partnership in Content Creation’, in CoyerK.DowmuntT.FountainA. (eds), The Alternative Media Handbook, Routledge, London, pp. 127–36.
28.
SpurgeonC.BurgessJ.KlaebeH.McWilliamK.TacchiJ.TsaiM.2009, ‘Co-creative Media: Theorising Digital Storytelling as a Platform for Researching and Developing Participatory Culture’, Proceedings of ANZCA09 Communication, Creativity and Global Citizenship, July, Brisbane.
29.
ThumimN.2009, ‘Self-representations in Wales and London’, in HartleyJ.McWilliamK. (eds), Story Circle: Digital Storytelling Around the World, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 205–17.
30.
ThumimN.2012, Self-Representation and Digital Culture, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
WatkinsJ.RussoA.2009, ‘Beyond Individual Expression: Working with Cultural Institutions’, in HartleyJ.McWilliamK. (eds), Story Circle: Digital Storytelling Around the World, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 269–78.
33.
ZimmermanP.1995, Reel Families: A Social History of Amateur Film, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
