Talk:Digital Media & Culture: Collaborative Essay Collection 2018/Transmediality/Research Question 2:Tara-Transmedia

Hi team Tara-Transmedia!

This is the discussion page for collaborative essay. Use this pages to edit in discussions, decision making, project planning, and information sharing. Invite other groups to add to the discussion, and contribute to others. Ask for advice from others and share your knowledge. This builds contribs considerably. Start off your discussion by recording your decision-making process re: your research question, email the lecturer to get approval/suggested amendments.Once that's done, you're away.

You can leave notifications for other users by using the reply to template (as I've used in this notice). You can also use your own and each other's discussion pages, as well as the main discussion page on the general theme page. All of this adds to contribs, which are essential to getting a pass mark for this assessment. Don't be tempted to use social media group chat or other platforms to do this. It won't be marked and really misses the entire point of the wiki.

Don't forget to use the four tildes (~) to sign and date your contribution. Every edit you make whilst signed in is still traceable, but a signature makes it much easier to track and respond, and much less likely that the edit will be mis-recognised as spam or vandalism. However: don't sign your edits on the essay page - it looks messy and is unnecessary.

Good Luck!
 * GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 19:14, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

- we need to see lots of discussion recorded here for you to amass "contribs" which are used to evaluate engagement. GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 12:51, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Research Question
"Transmedia storytelling represents a process where integral elements of a fiction get dispersed systematically across multiple delivery channels for the purpose of creating a unified and coordinated entertainment experience. Ideally, each medium makes its own unique contribution to the unfolding of the story." -Henry Jenkins. Discuss. Tga00002 (discuss • contribs) 18:44, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Brainstorming
We had decided that Henry Jenkins and transmedia storytelling would be a good focus for our essay. We propose to start off by introducing Henry Jenkins and Trasmediality followed by a presenting arguments supporting and undermining Henry Jenkins' such as Christian Fuchs. We also aim to incorporate in depth examples of transmedia storytelling such as Star Wars. Tga00002 (discuss • contribs) 18:52, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

If we all just post our sections on this page then we can look at it together to piece it together and work on the intro and conclusion together.

We also need to amalgamate a bibliography for it as well, just realised, shouldn't be too bad though. --Funkyalex (discuss • contribs) 13:51, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

If anyone has any images they would like to add let me know, I have been looking at the WIKI COMMONS page that has free to use images. --Funkyalex (discuss • contribs) 14:05, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Introduction
Hey guys, did a quick intro that can be added to



In the past few years transmediality and transmedia storytelling has totally altered the way in which film makers set about creating a world. It is now longer the norm to simply focus on a single film but rather, create something that can prosper and thrive in an ever expanding media entertainment market. Transmedia storytelling focusses on continuing narrative or characters or other aspects of a story across multiple means of media such as television, comics, video games to name a few. For the purpose of this essay we shall be conducting our research using Henry Jenkins' theories as a basis, he explains transmedia storytelling as,

"Transmedia storytelling represents a process where integral elements of a fiction get dispersed systematically across multiple delivery channels for the purpose of creating a unified and coordinated entertainment experience. Ideally, each medium makes its own unique contribution to the unfolding of the story." -Henry Jenkins

This essay will explore the in depth world of transmedia storytelling with relevant works, discuss some comparison works and how transmedia storytelling is seen in modern Hollywood with an example of the Star Wars franchise.

--Funkyalex (discuss • contribs) 09:28, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Main Concepts
Transmedia 202: Further Reflections Notes

•	Transmedia storytelling represents a process where integral elements of a fiction get dispersed systematically across multiple delivery channels for the purpose of creating a unified and coordinated entertainment experience. Ideally, each medium makes its own unique contribution to the unfolding of the story. •	Transmedia, used by itself, simply means "across media." •	So, there are some people who think that transmedia is simply a form of branding: I would rather argue that branding is one thing you can do with transmedia, but when I speak about transmedia storytelling, that is not the central focus of my interest. I am focusing on emergent forms of storytelling which tap into the flow of content across media and the networking of fan response. •	Transmedia storytelling describes one logic for thinking about the flow of content across media. We might also think about transmedia branding, transmedia performance, transmedia ritual, transmedia play, transmedia activism, and transmedia spectacle, as other logics. •	adaptation vs extension: •	adaptation takes the same story from one medium and retells it in another. •	Extension seeks to add something to the existing story as it moves from one medium to another. •	Additive comprehension, a term borrowed from game designer Neil Young, to refer to the degree that each new text adds to our understanding of the story as a whole.

•	Most transmedia content serves one or more of the following functions: •	Offers backstory •	Maps the World •	Offers us other character's perspectives on the action •	Deepens audience engagement.

•	radical intertextuality: •	Marvel and DC – characters move been different plots but still all exist within the same medium (comic books

The Hollywood based model of transmedia assumes a story told or a world explored across not simply multiple media but multiple texts, which can be sold to audiences separately and which represent multiple touch points with the brand.

•	Audience Participation – •	Interactivity: to do with the properties of the technology •	Participation: to do with the properties of the culture. Obviously, in practice, both may come into play in the same text. •	So, for example, a computer game stresses interactivity and thus preprogramed entertainment experiences. Fan culture is high on participation, where fans take the resources offered by a text and push it in a range of directions which are neither preprogrammed nor authorized by the producers.

•	There is no transmedia formula. Transmedia refers to a set of choices made about the best approach to tell a particular story to a particular audience in a particular context depending on the particular resources available to particular producers.

Christian Fuch, against Henry Jenkins:

Christian Fuchs has several issues with Henry Jenkins’ ICA Talk “Spreadable media” and tries to undermine his theory laying out the flaws of Jenkins’ argument drawing attention to Jenkins’ definition of ‘participation’, and his engagement with other theorists. Critical Studies scholars’ criticisms have influenced Jenkins work, according to Jenkins, however Fuchs questions how much he has engaged with other scholars’ work and how much Jenkins has actually changed his analysis. He refers to social media users as like a Habermasian public sphere. However Fuchs believes that Jenkins’ notion of Habermasian public sphere is incorrect. Habermas asserts that corporate social media are declarations of the limits of the bourgeois public sphere in contrast to Jenkins’ definition. Fuchs furthermore questions if he has truly engaged with Critical Studies scholars as he makes a critical error in misnaming scholars such as Hans Magnus Enzensberger and Mark Andrejevic. He uses quotations from Enzensberger however presents a different view on corporatism and participation to him tainting his argument. Jenkins furthermore miss-references a quotation from Enzensberger’s work in 1970, stateing it was from the 1960’s. Fuchs points out that Jenkins does not mention several important issues such as what role social media and media in general has in protests, political rebellions and revolutions, and does not touch on WikiLeaks, where he ought to as he is a leading scholar. Jenkins focus’ on the aspects of pleasure and creativity without giving much thought to exploitation which is a dominating issue in relation to Web 2.0 and therefore does not grasp the dialectics that is being created. Fuchs asserts that we need to take into consideration not only what phenomena we find on social media, but how they interconnected and to what degree they are present. It is clear that Web 2.0. users are creative but we need to consider to what extent they are active and to what extent of creativity their practices have. It is considered that Cultural Studies scholars such as Jenkins have tendency to exaggerate the creativity and activity of users on the web. Creativity does not lie out with exploitation to web 2.0, but is its very foundation. Fuchs brings particular attention to Jenkins’ notion of ‘participation’ which is about expressions, engagement, creation, sharing, experience, contributions and feelings which Jenkins has continuously argued that “the Web has become a site of consumer participation”. Fuchs’ issue with ‘participatory culture’ lies within the assertion that participation is a political science term that is heavily linked to participatory democracy theory. Jenkins has a culturalistic notion of participation and dismisses the notion of participatory democracy: he ignores questions of ownership of companies or platforms, joint decision-making, profit, class and the dispensation of material benefits. Fuchs argues that if anything, users and employees of corporate platforms such as Facebook are excluded from economic decision-making, they do not ‘participate’. Jenkins, in Fuchs’ opinion has a reductionist comprehension of culture that dismisses contemporary culture’s political economy. He ignores the wide concept of participatory democracy and its issues for the internet focusing his notion of participation to a cultural dimension. The web is controlled by corporations that gain capital through exploiting and commodifying individuals therefore can never be participatory according to participatory democracy. It can only be participatory where there is opposition to corporate authority and where users are involved in non-profit, non-commercial internet projects for example Wikipedia. Fuchs asserts that Jenkins dismiss questions of who dominates and financially benefit from cooperate social media. Tga00002 (discuss • contribs) 17:44, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Will Brooker: Will Brooker presents in his article ‘Living on Dawson’s Creek: Teen viewers, cultural convergence, and television overflow’ difficulties of cultural convergence associated with the televising show Dawson’s Creek and its viewers, arguing that modern television is increasingly overflowing from the original script across several platforms, and that the programme seeks participatory engagement which builds the programme as an extended, invested experience. Viewers can follow the television show Dawson’s Creek on websites such as Dawson’s creek.com which includes features such as ‘slam book’, ‘summer diaries’, e-postcards, show playlists and bulletin boards, drawing them into the Dawson Creek experience. These are in place so that the narrative continues when the show ends; the show is not limited to the television medium. Brooker makes a significant amount of references to Henry Jenkins work, specifically his notion of convergence and his ‘black box’ analogy: Brooker has clearly been influenced by Jenkins’ work. The article draws attention to Jenkins example of convergence – his son owning a laptop, a CD player, and a big screen TV are privileges, so Brooker questions whether less privileged individuals have the same opportunity to participate in cultural convergence? Furthermore geographical differences also make it more difficult to participate in convergence due to time lag issues: the airing time of Dawson Creek is very different to the UK presenting media convergence issues. The Dawson’s Creek fan sites creates a problem for Jenkins’ stern distinction between owner-produced and fan-produced convergence: the official site could be viewed to encourage creativity and community through its many features, or perhaps these interactive forums purely propose an advanced process of incorporation by the producers. The site could be argued that it is effectively maintaining fans in its own playing fields and restraining resistance by attracting ‘folk’ culture within cooperate boundaries. Brooker argues that Dawson Creek’s audience participation is confined to Jenkins’ notion of media convergence, instead of folk art. It is clear that Will Brooker has been highly influenced by Henry Jenkins and his notion of media convergence, and Brookers example of Dawson’s Creek is an excellent example of this. Tga00002 (discuss • contribs) 23:19, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Transmedia Storytelling


Now that we have established Henry Jenkin’s theories surrounding transmediality and transmedia storytelling it would be apt to show how this is established in 21st century Hollywood. As an example this essay shall focus primarily on the Star Wars franchise and Disney’s involvement in the franchise. Disney’s involvement in the Star Wars franchise caused an international eruption in an already mammoth universe when they purchased LucasFilm in 2012. The franchise is now heavily featured in every sort of medium, from the successful blockbusters to travel mugs in the local supermarket. It is a transmedia phenomenon and a contender for world’s most profitable entertainment franchise. A characteristic of Star Wars that makes it the masterpiece that it is, is largely through its use of transmedia storytelling, in which there are few other franchises that could rival Star Wars for top place. This is where Henry Jenkins features and we are reminded by the essay question,

“Transmedia storytelling represents a process where integral elements of a fiction get dispersed systematically across multiple delivery channels for the purpose of creating a unified and coordinated entertainment experience” (Jenkins 2004: 31)

Star Wars is an excellent example of transmedia storytelling as it uses various mediums of output such as blockbuster films, television series, comic book, novels and video games to name a few. A reason that Star Wars is able to take full advantage of this type of storytelling is largely due to the incredibly rich and prosperous world that George Lucas created back in the 1970’s. When Star Wars came out in 1977 it single handedly managed to change to entire film industry, showing how a film could be turned into a merchandising and branding juggernaut, and then turning into one of the most successful entertainment franchises to date. We discuss the topic transmedia storytelling today, however Star Wars has been using this method over the last four decades, creating discussions between storytelling, participatory audiences and ever-changing media-industrial practices.

Jenkins on Lucas and Star Wars
Henry Jenkins discusses his experiences of Star Wars in the foreword for Star Wars and the history of Transmedia Storytelling. He explains how he was not necessarily enthralled by the concept as, at the time, he was a Star Trek fan, however he has now been totally encapsulated by the franchise as it not only met the needs of young fans but allowed genuine discussion between more mature film goers, even meeting his wife over a Star Wars fueled debate.

“There’s no question that George Lucas was a founding figure in the evolution of modern transmedia storytelling.” (Jenkins 2018:17)

Jenkins explains some of the reasoning behind the franchise becoming a transmedia masterpiece. When Lucas sought out funding for the original film he opted to waive his director fee in turn for a percentage of the gross of supplementary products. As this was to be his source of income it meant that it became important for Lucas to create a world where extra merchandising products and spin offs could take place and as this interest was so important for his revenues it meant that it was also important to the stories that were created. As a result of this decision it meant that the Star Wars story could continue off the screen and throughout other sources of mediums when the blockbusters were not being shown. This was unheard of at the time as no other science fiction franchise had managed to so fully saturate and entire generations media experiences, a genre that was merely a sub category, now being recognized as base for mass entertainment spectacle.

Synergy and Disney


Star Wars also falls under Jenkins’ ideas surrounding transmediality and synergy. The notion of Synergy is that one means of production owns or has economic interest in various media outlets. With these rights to ownership it allows them to better use transmedia branding and storytelling as a narrative structure in order to spread narrative, characters and settings across the multiple mediums and therefore maximize their returns invested. In the case of Star Wars and Synergy, Disney is the nucleus of the operation. Walt Disney Studios distributes the films in the cinema, Star Wars: Rebels is distributed on the television on Disney XD channel, the comics and graphic novels are distributed through Marvel Comics (which is now owned by Disney) and finally the narrative is continued through video games such as Star Wars: Battlefront. This allows for different ways in which to read Star Wars, one being as a world of its own, a world that you can explore different areas and gain in depth new background information as if it was a part of the main story. Each of these different areas being transmitted and told through the multiple mediums discussed. This means that fans are able to attempt to achieve a superior knowledge of the franchise as the information is out there but means that we, as the audience, have to search across all platforms for the much needed knowledge.

Conclusion
Star wars managed to set a new bar for transmedia storytelling, a claim that Henry Jenkins himself would agree with. It is continually paving the way for ingenious methods of both storytelling and merchandising and setting examples for other franchises to follow. Now with the success of the more recent exploits of Star Wars one can only speculate what the future will hold for the franchise.

--Funkyalex (discuss • contribs) 14:28, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Visitor Comments
Hi team Tara-Transmedia.

I find our research really interesting and helpful to me as my team are also focusing on transmediality. It is clearly an important part of new media culture as it allows for a greater advancements of narrative and thus enjoyment. I agree that DC and Marvel are very good examples of this (also due to it originally being a comic), I would be interested to know if you will be using this specifically as examples for your essay? I would also be interested to know if you think transmediality (in relation to audience participation) is important in fan culture and how the text stands alone.

The extract: 'Genre, Reception, and Adaptation in the 'Twilight' Series Fandoms' may be quite useful to you guys.

Good luck with everything, be sure to pop over to Taran-Trios page to leave a comment if you have some free time. KaYuI (discuss • contribs) 17:56, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey team just wanted to say a big well done, I think we've all done massively well. Good luck to you all!MTxPrincipessa18 (discuss • contribs) 10:53, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Henry Jenkins on Transmedia Storytelling - Calum's Section
This part of this essay will attempt to deconstruct and assess Henry Jenkins’ definition and overall thoughts on transmedia storytelling. Particular attention will be paid towards Jenkins’ article ‘Transmedia 202: Further Reflections’, which has also been deconstructed into note form in the ‘Main Concepts’ section of this wikipage. Other works of Henry Jenkins will be looked at as well to offer more support to the concept of transmedia storytelling within this collaborative essay. Jenkins opens his article by saying, “transmedia storytelling represents a process where integral elements of a fiction get dispersed systematically across multiple delivery channels for the purpose of creating a unified and coordinated entertainment experience,” which is the main discussion point of our collaborative essay. What Jenkins is saying here is that transmedia storytelling is a way in which a story unfolds through various forms of media, whether that is in films as well as video games, or even TV and books. Each form of media offers their own unique storytelling experience and when put together, offer a more complete narrative. Jenkins also borrows a term from video game designer Neil Young – ‘additive comprehension’. This refers to the degree in which each new medium adds our understanding to the story as a whole. Jenkins then breaks down transmedia storytelling into a more concise way of thinking. He believes that transmedia offers the following to a narrative: backstory, world mapping, other character’s perspectives and also a deepening of audience engagement. All of this clearly allows a narrative to have more depth and create an immersive world for audiences across multiple mediums. This idea is of world building is discussed again in Jenkins’ book Convergence Culture. Jenkins says that “more and more, storytelling has become the art of world building, as artists create compelling environments that cannot be fully explored or exhausted within a single work or even a single medium.” In this article, Jenkins highlights some criticisms that have been raised by others about his thoughts on transmedia storytelling. A lot of criticisms seem to highlight that transmedia storytelling is simply just a way of corporatizing a franchise. For example, he talks about how some people believe that transmedia storytelling is simply a form of branding. Jenkins then discusses how he feels it is better to see branding as one specific part of transmedia storytelling, but should not be the main focus of transmediality as a whole. To allow for a clearer idea of what transmedia storytelling is, Jenkins uses ‘The Matrix’ as a useful example. As a franchise, ‘The Matrix’ particularly benefits from transmedia storytelling due to the amount of world building it creates. Audiences can experience the main body of the story through the three theatrical films that were released. However, if further investment is desired, audiences can experience the world of ‘The Matrix’ through various other mediums such as video games, short films and comic books. All of these extra platforms add more layers to the world of ‘The Matrix’ and it is clear why Jenkins uses this franchise as a prime example. To see just how big a part transmedia storytelling plays in ‘The Matrix’, it is important to begin to look at specific mediums within the franchise. More world building is offered with the video game ‘Enter the Matrix’ with tie-ins to the original theatrical film ‘The Matrix’. In the film, we encounter two characters named Ghost and Niobe. These characters offer little impact to the overall narrative of the film and are simply supporting roles. However, if fans of the franchise play ‘Enter the Matrix’, they in fact get to journey through the narrative of the game playing as either character. The game offers side-stories that run linear to the overall plot of the film, therefore more in-depth story elements are experienced by the player. Jenkins, as mentioned before, believes that transmedia storytelling offers other character’s perspectives. Since audiences get the chance to experience these characters role in the story allows for a deepening of audience engagement and more backstory. Also, players will get a sense that these supporting characters in the film now have a newly found greater impact on the overall story. Further transmedia storytelling is shown within ‘The Matrix’ through various other mediums. A series of animated short films were also released to create a deeper narrative within ‘The Matrix’ franchise. ‘The Animatrix’ featured stories which intertwined with the main body of ‘The Matrix’, and featured new narratives with side characters audiences may have already been familiar with. Jenkins talks about other ways in which transmedia storytelling can exist. He talks about how various characters move been different plots but still all exist within the same medium. This is known as ‘radical intertextuality’ and is particularly relevant within comic books. Jenkins talks about Marvel Comics as an example. Many characters within Marvel Comics will encounter each other within different stories, and other characters may not. Marvel’s ‘Civil War’ was used by Jenkins as another example. Within this comic book story, various characters encounter each other who audiences would never have expected to ever meet. The characters can exist within their own standalone adventures and then can also crossover into greater, more populated storylines. Overall, after delving into Henry Jenkins thoughts on transmedia storytelling, it’s clear that he offers a clear, concise idea of what transmediality is in his article. His opening statement, “transmedia storytelling represents a process where integral elements of a fiction get dispersed systematically across multiple delivery channels for the purpose of creating a unified and coordinated entertainment experience,” which is also the main focus of this essay, is broken down further and given clarity through his dissection and use of ‘The Matrix’ as an example. The other sections of this essay will include a more focussed look and some criticisms of Jenkins’ work, as well as a discussion about how ‘Star Wars’ exists as an example of transmedia storytelling.

Against Henry Jenkins: Christian Fuchs - Tara
Christian Fuchs has several issues with Henry Jenkins’ ICA Talk “Spreadable media” and tries to undermine his theory laying out the flaws of Jenkins’ argument drawing attention to Jenkins’ definition of ‘participation’, and his engagement with other theorists. Critical Studies scholars’ criticisms have influenced Jenkins work, according to Jenkins, however Fuchs questions how much he has engaged with other scholars’ work and how much Jenkins has actually changed his analysis. He refers to social media users as like a Habermasian public sphere. However Fuchs believes that Jenkins’ notion of Habermasian public sphere is incorrect. Habermas asserts that corporate social media are declarations of the limits of the bourgeois public sphere in contrast to Jenkins’ definition. Fuchs furthermore questions if he has truly engaged with Critical Studies scholars as he makes a critical error in misnaming scholars such as Hans Magnus Enzensberger and Mark Andrejevic. He uses quotations from Enzensberger however presents a different view on corporatism and participation to him tainting his argument. Jenkins furthermore miss-references a quotation from Enzensberger’s work in 1970, stateing it was from the 1960’s. Fuchs points out that Jenkins does not mention several important issues such as what role social media and media in general has in protests, political rebellions and revolutions, and does not touch on WikiLeaks, where he ought to as he is a leading scholar. Jenkins focus’ on the aspects of pleasure and creativity without giving much thought to exploitation which is a dominating issue in relation to Web 2.0 and therefore does not grasp the dialectics that is being created. Fuchs asserts that we need to take into consideration not only what phenomena we find on social media, but how they interconnected and to what degree they are present. It is clear that Web 2.0. users are creative but we need to consider to what extent they are active and to what extent of creativity their practices have. It is considered that Cultural Studies scholars such as Jenkins have tendency to exaggerate the creativity and activity of users on the web. Creativity does not lie out with exploitation to web 2.0, but is its very foundation. Fuchs brings particular attention to Jenkins’ notion of ‘participation’ which is about expressions, engagement, creation, sharing, experience, contributions and feelings which Jenkins has continuously argued that “the Web has become a site of consumer participation”. Fuchs’ issue with ‘participatory culture’ lies within the assertion that participation is a political science term that is heavily linked to participatory democracy theory. Jenkins has a culturalistic notion of participation and dismisses the notion of participatory democracy: he ignores questions of ownership of companies or platforms, joint decision-making, profit, class and the dispensation of material benefits. Fuchs argues that if anything, users and employees of corporate platforms such as Facebook are excluded from economic decision-making, they do not ‘participate’. Jenkins, in Fuchs’ opinion has a reductionist comprehension of culture that dismisses contemporary culture’s political economy. He ignores the wide concept of participatory democracy and its issues for the internet focusing his notion of participation to a cultural dimension. The web is controlled by corporations that gain capital through exploiting and commodifying individuals therefore can never be participatory according to participatory democracy. It can only be participatory where there is opposition to corporate authority and where users are involved in non-profit, non-commercial internet projects for example Wikipedia. Fuchs asserts that Jenkins dismiss questions of who dominates and financially benefit from cooperate social media. Tga00002 (discuss • contribs) 17:44, 23 March 2018 (UTC) Tga00002 (discuss • contribs) 23:23, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Will Brooker: Dawson's Creek - Tara
Will Brooker presents in his article ‘Living on Dawson’s Creek: Teen viewers, cultural convergence, and television overflow’ difficulties of cultural convergence associated with the televising show Dawson’s Creek and its viewers, arguing that modern television is increasingly overflowing from the original script across several platforms, and that the programme seeks participatory engagement which builds the programme as an extended, invested experience. Viewers can follow the television show Dawson’s Creek on websites such as Dawson’s creek.com which includes features such as ‘slam book’, ‘summer diaries’, e-postcards, show playlists and bulletin boards, drawing them into the Dawson Creek experience. These are in place so that the narrative continues when the show ends; the show is not limited to the television medium. Brooker makes a significant amount of references to Henry Jenkins work, specifically his notion of convergence and his ‘black box’ analogy: Brooker has clearly been influenced by Jenkins’ work. The article draws attention to Jenkins example of convergence – his son owning a laptop, a CD player, and a big screen TV are privileges, so Brooker questions whether less privileged individuals have the same opportunity to participate in cultural convergence? Furthermore geographical differences also make it more difficult to participate in convergence due to time lag issues: the airing time of Dawson Creek is very different to the UK presenting media convergence issues. The Dawson’s Creek fan sites creates a problem for Jenkins’ stern distinction between owner-produced and fan-produced convergence: the official site could be viewed to encourage creativity and community through its many features, or perhaps these interactive forums purely propose an advanced process of incorporation by the producers. The site could be argued that it is effectively maintaining fans in its own playing fields and restraining resistance by attracting ‘folk’ culture within cooperate boundaries. Brooker argues that Dawson Creek’s audience participation is confined to Jenkins’ notion of media convergence, instead of folk art. It is clear that Will Brooker has been highly influenced by Henry Jenkins and his notion of media convergence, and Brookers example of Dawson’s Creek is an excellent example of this. Tga00002 (discuss • contribs) 23:19, 4 April 2018 (UTC) Tga00002 (discuss • contribs) 23:25, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Against Henry Jenkins: Christian Fuchs
Christian Fuchs has several issues with Henry Jenkins’ ICA Talk “Spreadable media” and tries to undermine his theory laying out the flaws of Jenkins’ argument drawing attention to Jenkins’ definition of ‘participation’, and his engagement with other theorists. Critical Studies scholars’ criticisms have influenced Jenkins work, according to Jenkins, however Fuchs questions how much he has engaged with other scholars’ work and how much Jenkins has actually changed his analysis. He refers to social media users as like a Habermasian public sphere. However Fuchs believes that Jenkins’ notion of Habermasian public sphere is incorrect. Habermas asserts that corporate social media are declarations of the limits of the bourgeois public sphere in contrast to Jenkins’ definition. Fuchs furthermore questions if he has truly engaged with Critical Studies scholars as he makes a critical error in misnaming scholars such as Hans Magnus Enzensberger and Mark Andrejevic. He uses quotations from Enzensberger however presents a different view on corporatism and participation to him tainting his argument. Jenkins furthermore miss-references a quotation from Enzensberger’s work in 1970, stateing it was from the 1960’s. Fuchs points out that Jenkins does not mention several important issues such as what role social media and media in general has in protests, political rebellions and revolutions, and does not touch on WikiLeaks, where he ought to as he is a leading scholar. Jenkins focus’ on the aspects of pleasure and creativity without giving much thought to exploitation which is a dominating issue in relation to Web 2.0 and therefore does not grasp the dialectics that is being created. Fuchs asserts that we need to take into consideration not only what phenomena we find on social media, but how they interconnected and to what degree they are present. It is clear that Web 2.0. users are creative but we need to consider to what extent they are active and to what extent of creativity their practices have. It is considered that Cultural Studies scholars such as Jenkins have tendency to exaggerate the creativity and activity of users on the web. Creativity does not lie out with exploitation to web 2.0, but is its very foundation. Fuchs brings particular attention to Jenkins’ notion of ‘participation’ which is about expressions, engagement, creation, sharing, experience, contributions and feelings which Jenkins has continuously argued that “the Web has become a site of consumer participation”. Fuchs’ issue with ‘participatory culture’ lies within the assertion that participation is a political science term that is heavily linked to participatory democracy theory. Jenkins has a culturalistic notion of participation and dismisses the notion of participatory democracy: he ignores questions of ownership of companies or platforms, joint decision-making, profit, class and the dispensation of material benefits. Fuchs argues that if anything, users and employees of corporate platforms such as Facebook are excluded from economic decision-making, they do not ‘participate’. Jenkins, in Fuchs’ opinion has a reductionist comprehension of culture that dismisses contemporary culture’s political economy. He ignores the wide concept of participatory democracy and its issues for the internet focusing his notion of participation to a cultural dimension. The web is controlled by corporations that gain capital through exploiting and commodifying individuals therefore can never be participatory according to participatory democracy. It can only be participatory where there is opposition to corporate authority and where users are involved in non-profit, non-commercial internet projects for example Wikipedia. Fuchs asserts that Jenkins dismiss questions of who dominates and financially benefit from cooperate social media. Tga00002 Tga00002 (discuss • contribs) 10:44, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

INSTRUCTOR FEEDBACK
General Feedback
 * Essays of this standard attain the following grade descriptor for the collaborative essay. Whereas not all of the elements here will be directly relevant to your particular response to the brief, this will give you a clearer idea of how the grade you have been given relates to the standards and quality expected of work at this level (although it should be noted that this work is right at the upper end of this grade description):
 * Satisfactory. Among other things, satisfactory standard work may try to relate an idea from the module to an original example, but might not be very convincing. It may waste space on synopsis or description, rather than making a point. It may have spelling or grammatical errors and typos. It might not demonstrate more than a single quick pass at the assignment, informed only by lecture materials and/or cursory reading. It may suggest reading but not thinking (or indeed the reverse). The wiki markup formatting will need some work.

Specific Feedback:


 * You have submitted a fairly well written response to the brief. Here you outline a number of arguments that specifically address the theme of transmedia, and your discussion of the research evidences a fair working knowledge of some of the scholarship on your chosen topic. I would have liked to have seen engagement a bit further beyond the set reading than is evident here, and also beyond Jenkins’ work – although what is included is very useful indeed at times, and it works as an argument overall.


 * The essay is written in a fairly mature, accessible style, and your argument is well structured, using signpost techniques and reflective discussion to draw the reader’s attention to the salient points. Your essay question is particularly well chosen. The work represents a meaningful attempt to critically engage with both the conceptual material encountered in research, and with the examples that you use to illustrate points made.


 * You have demonstrated at least awareness of the contradictions inherent in the theme itself by . I would have liked to have seen much more in the way of making the most out of the platform’s affordances – embedded links, images, and interwiki links to other parts of the wikibook would have really allows you to explore this aspect of the process. There are, it can be noted, elements that shouldn’t be on the essay page itself, such as sections which include signature and timestamp. These belong on discussion pages. However, this is still fairly solid work, with lots of potential for future development. It was noted that the bulk of the Conclusion section was added after the deadline had passed, so I’ve taken this into consideration and applied the 3% penalty for late submission. The alternative was to consider a shorter essay without a decent Conclusion section, which would have substantially affected the mark to your disadvantage.


 * N.B.:’’’Feedback for your Discussion, engagement and contribs elements for the assessment will be given on your individual User Discussion Pages. Grades for all work will communicated confidentially via Canvas.’’’

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 11:37, 23 April 2018 (UTC)