Content Sharing

This weeks activity had me create a meme using other peoples work  and distributing it to an online community via the university blackboard, all without breaking any copyright laws. The term Meme was new to me, and was described as "a cultural idea that's perpetuated" (Leaver, 2011) but once examples were given such as LOL cats, I realised I was very familiar with the concept - with  fail images, and  remixes and Mashups such as the Bert and Ernie tries gansta-rap youtube videos.

Basically a meme is a running joke that goes viral over the internet and that anyone can join in on. Memes are easy to create using "remixable elements" and are spread via social media or email etc. They perpetuate as they are passed around, new people add new images or text video or music and keep the joke running  until it runs its course and a new one starts (Leaver, 2011).

So here is my masterpiece where Ive jumped on the  “motivational poster” bandwagon 

After posting the pic on the blackboard I received a comment from a fellow student who stated that she liked that the poster was my "own creative work" which is something I found interesting as neither the image, the words, the layout or the original concept are mine.

The photo called "funny foot" was taken from flickr and belongs to Evelyn Giggles in 2009 who has licenced it under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 (Generic).  Creative commons (CC) were developed in 2001/2002 (History) and are a set of copyright licences that allow owners of works stipulate what they will and wont allow other people to do with their works. As current copyright law stipulates that it is illegal to use the work of someone else without their permission, CC allows people to give permission easily and efficiently and promotes sharing of content. There are currently 6 different types of licences that vary in their degree of restrictions.

The Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 licence allows me to reproduce, remix and even use the photo "funny foot" for commercially if I wish as long as I attribute it to the original owner. Therefore I have used the image and added a reference. It was not my mind that was creative enough to produce it but I can use it.

The words are also not mine, just common vernacular which could breach copyright as they are similar but not the same as the lyrics to the song "when your smiling" After some research I found that this song was created by Cliff Bruner in 1938 and is in the public domain, meaning that it is OK for me to use it as well.

Finally the layout and the idea are not mine either. These types of inspirational poster memes have been doing social networking and email loops for quite some time, so much that the website BIGHUGELABS has created simple and easy to use software that you can create these memes in within seconds allowing for the easy perpetuation of the joke, that is easily recognisable not just by its humer but also its black and white basic layout and design.

Therefore the only originality was the combination of the elements... remixed to create something new, whilst also fitting into the common theme of the meme. 

History.  Creative Commons Retrieved from http://creativecommons.org/about/history

Leaver, D. T.(2011). Content Sharing. Web Communications 101/ 501 Retrieved from http://dbs.ilectures.curtin.edu.au/lectopia/casterframe.lasso?fid=691872&cnt=true&usr=not-indicated&name=not-indicated

Content Sharing: Folksonomies

What do you think of folksonomies as a way of organizing information?

 

I agree with Weinberger’s argument that folksonomies are needed today in order to give the Western tradition of essentialism a good “kick in the teeth”. As Weinberger explains “Essentialism says that of all the ways of understanding a thing, one is its real way” (Weinberger 2006), while folksonomies (created by everyone and anyone) allow for a broader understanding of meanings. Therefore both the top down models of essentialism (such as dictionary meanings or library catalogues) and the grass roots models of folksonomies (created by tagging) are needed in order to create balance in the way information is organized and categorized. As such information is made searchable and findable for the layperson and the professional alike in both online and offline environments.

Is it free of bias or only useful to those who share a similar vocabulary?

No, I don’t think any form of information categorization can be truly unbiased, and as many other people have pointed out folksonomies are only useful to those who share a vocabulary. Different languages, different cultures and even generational gaps can cause the understanding of the meanings of words, to alter from person to person, although I do not think that folksonomies should be totally written off as a way for information categorization. As Mathes states the feedback a user receives after tagging an item is “ immediate .As soon as you assign a tag to an item, you see the cluster of items carrying the same tag. If that’s not what you expected, you’re given incentive to change the tag or add another.” (Mathes 2004)Therefore although people create their own categorization tags, they have the opportunity to fine tune the tagging to match that of the broader community, allowing for some general consensus, should the participant choose to partake in this part of the process.

Mathes, A.(2004). Folksonomies - Cooperative Classification and Communication Through Shared Metadata. Computer Mediated Communication - LIS590CMC Retrieved from http://www.adammathes.com/academic/computer-mediated-communication/folksonomies.html

Weinberger, D.(2006). Folksonomy as a Symbol. Retrieved from http://lms.curtin.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_4_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_40430_1%26url%3D