Smart Culture: Impact of the Internet on Artistic Creation. Focus: Use of New Digital Technologies at Cultural Festivals.
E-Book, Englisch, 165 Seiten
ISBN: 978-84-15272-80-9
Verlag: Dosdoce
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: Wasserzeichen (»Systemvoraussetzungen)
To achieve this aim, the broad-ranging content of the third edition of the report has been divided into two main sections to make it easier to read for the different audiences at which it is aimed. 'Smart Culture' is the overarching theme established by the Advisory Committee of the AC/E Digital Culture Annual Report 2016 as a basis for choosing the six articles that make up the first part of this year's edition. Just as the first report's Focus dealt with the impact of the Internet on the performing arts (theatre, opera, dance, ballet, etc.) and that of the second edition analysed the use of new technologies in the world of museums, for this third edition it conducts a thorough analysis of the use of new technologies at some 50 Spanish and foreign cultural festivals.
Autoren/Hrsg.
Weitere Infos & Material
Index
THE WIKIPEDIA PHENOMENON IN TODAY'S SOCIETY: FIFTEEN YEARS ON
Iván Martínez · @protoplasmakid
THE IMPACT OF THE INTERNET ON CULTURAL CREATION
Mariana Moura Santos · @marysaints
THE ART MARKET IN THE AGE OF ACCESS
Pau Waelder · @pauwl
HOW THE PERFORMING ARTS ARE CHANGING IN THE DIGITAL AGE
Pepe Zapata · @PepeZapata
VIDEOGAME DESIGN AND DISRUPTIVE PRAXIS
Lara Sánchez Coterón @laracoteron
DATA, INTERFACES & STORYTELLING: AUDIOVISUAL IN THE DIGITAL AGE
Montecarlo @Imastranger
FOCUS: USE OF NEW DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES AT CULTURAL FESTIVALS
Elisabet Roselló
Javier Celaya
INTRODUCTION
1. NEW TECHNOLOGIES
AS CONTENT
1.1. New media festivals
1.2. Multi-genre festivals that are opening up to new media
2. NT BEFORE AND DURING THE FESTIVAL
2.1. Social media and communities
2.2. Own apps
2.3. Crowdsourcing, crowdfunding and participation
2.4. Online content (digitisation) and use of streaming
2.5. Beacons
2.6. Wearables and payment wristbands
2.7. Drones
2.8. Other technologies: responsive websites, QR codes (reflection), Big Data and VR
3. A POST-DIGITAL AND CONTEXTUALISED APPROACH
4. CONCLUSIONS
ORGANISED AND PUBLISHED BY
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
THE WIKIPEDIA PHENOMENON IN TODAY’S SOCIETY: FIFTEEN YEARS ON
IVÁN MARTÍNEZ · @PROTOPLASMAKID
AVAILABLE UNDER A CREATIVE COMMONS ATTRIBUTION-SHAREALIKE 4.0 LICENCE Iván Martínez (1983) studied history at the UNAM and is a journalist and Wikipedian. Since 2012, he has been president of Wikimedia México A.C., the local representative of the Wikimedia Foundation which owns Wikipedia. He was chief coordinator of the 11th international Wikimania conference held from 15 to 19 July 2015, and is a member of the foundation’s Funds Dissemination Committee and a volunteer for Wikipedia in Spanish. As a lecturer, he has given talks on free knowledge in seven Mexican states and at some 50 university, business and cultural institutions. He has taken part in international events related to the Wikimedia movement in France, Germany, Poland, Israel, China, Argentina, Chile and the United Kingdom, where he has delivered four lectures on his projects. Since 2013 he has conducted the only Wikipedia-based radio show in the world: Moebius 909, broadcast by Ibero 90.9 FM, a public radio station of the Universidad Iberoamericana. He wrote for the FayerWayer, Código Espagueti and El Diario.es blogs. His opinions have been taken up by international media such as the South China Morning Herald, Radio Netherlands, Radio Amherst Massachusetts and Yorokobu and by the leading national television, radio and Internet media. 1. Wikipedia: the free Internet encyclopaedia.
Premises: daughter of free software and French encyclopaedists.
Nearly 15 years since it was created, Wikipedia, the self-styled free encyclopaedia, is a resource that serves 16 billion pages per month. Its self-regulated ecosystem, its editorial standards and its capacity to enlist nearly 75,000 volunteers1 who extend and modify it daily is the subject of research, criticism and everyday comments in the main environments of cultural reproduction and transmission of knowledge: the family, the mass media and schools. It is one of the most dynamic, ambitious and collaborative Internet projects (Ortega: 2009). The Wikipedia universe is a dense web of volunteers who exploit this diversity. It embraces a variety of trends, influences, motivations and opinions from all over the world and is following a steadily upward course. Nearly 500 academic writings are produced year after year, including exercises, quantitative and qualitative analyses, comparative studies and above all criticism of the project. They attempt to find answers to and predict a phenomenon which, although having a few significant actors, bears on its shoulders the weight of an encyclopaedia that has undoubtedly had a social impact on Internet users worldwide, probably with the exception of China, where it was totally forbidden at the end of 2015.2 Wikipedia is a living resource that is part of millions of people’s lives. And as such, its relationship with society, like that of many other resources for reproducing knowledge and information, is not without controversy. The clash between the poles of production and reproduction of traditional knowledge with their global industries, associations, universities, schools, organisations and cultural secretariats and a ‘bunch of nobodies’, as Wikipedian and journalist Andrew Lih affectionately calls the community in his book The Wikipedia Revolution, is a living fact in the process of finding common ground. The direct precedents of Wikipedia are Richard Stallman’s GNUpedia project (Lih: 2009) and, in particular, his free software philosophy that has developed intensely since the 1980s and is now an irreversible factor in part of the hardware and software that make the technological world possible. As Peter Burke has pointed out, there is a direct link between the French encyclopaedia and Wikipedia’s current level of dissemination at the start of the twenty-first century. Its model of entries is predominantly based on the structure established by the French in the eighteenth century, preserving the classification standards of the latter practically intact, albeit possibly enriched by the famous Britannica, with which it is often associated and compared.3 The early Internet saw the explosion of replicas of electronic likenesses ranging from the ‘real’ world to that of the Web 1.0: virtual museums, virtual walks, virtual marketplaces, email, ebooks. And the new big bang triggered by the Web 2.0. gave rise to the creation of the collective power of the predicted prosumption (Toffler: 1980), that is, creation and emergence based on collective, dynamic content generated by people. Wikipedia’s direct precedents are the philosophy of free software, collective content generated by people and the eighteenth-century French encyclopaedia. This went hand-in-hand with a type of organisation which, as Yochai Bechler pointed out (Lih: 2009), was already being practiced in computational environments in free software communities: peer production of knowledge based on fruitful interaction between the notion of common good or, rather, the commons, and technology (Lafuente: 2008), all in an environment where tools are relatively easy to learn and the meritocracy spurs an almost egocentric personal satisfaction. This survey aims to provide an overview of the project as of 2015 – an undertaking which, I should point out, triggers a conflict of interests in this author, as my track record as of today includes 10,000 Wikipedia edits and 23,000 for the projects of the Wikimedia Foundation. I have also headed my country’s Wikimedia chapter since 2011. The five pillars
Wikipedia has five main rules that apply to its current editions in 288 different languages. They are called the ‘five pillars’, in allusion to the structural elements that support an edifice. There are hundreds of policies, recommendations, guidelines and essays that regulate the encyclopaedia, but only five basic rules. Wikipedians use these five rules to argue their case and there is seldom consensus when, as in legal practice, they consider one to be more valid than another. These five rules, as published in English, are: 1. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia: It combines many features of general and specialized encyclopaedias, almanacs, and gazetteers. Wikipedia is not a soapbox, an advertising platform, a vanity press, an experiment in anarchy or democracy, an indiscriminate collection of information, or a web directory. It is not a dictionary, a newspaper, or a collection of source documents, although some of its fellow Wikimedia projects are. 2. Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view: We strive for articles that document and explain major points of view, giving due weight with respect to their prominence in an impartial tone. We avoid advocacy and we characterize information and issues rather than debate them. In some areas there may be just one well-recognized point of view; in others, we describe multiple points of view, presenting each accurately and in context rather than as “the truth” or “the best view”. All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources, especially when the topic is controversial or is on living persons. Editors’ personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong. 3. Wikipedia is free content that anyone can use, edit, and distribute: Since all editors freely license their work to the public, no editor owns an article and any contributions can and will be mercilessly edited and redistributed. Respect copyright laws, and never plagiarize from sources. Borrowing non-free media is sometimes allowed as fair use, but strive to find free alternatives first. 4. Wikipedia editors should treat each other with respect and civility: Respect your fellow Wikipedians, even when you disagree. Apply Wikipedia etiquette, and don’t engage in personal attacks. Seek consensus, avoid edit wars, and never disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. Act in good faith, and assume good faith on the part of others. Be open and welcoming to newcomers. Should conflicts arise, discuss them calmly on the appropriate talk pages, follow dispute resolution procedures, and consider that there are 5,060,896 articles on the English Wikipedia to improve and discuss. 5. Wikipedia has no firm rules: Wikipedia has policies and guidelines, but they are not carved in stone; their content and interpretation can evolve over time. The principles and spirit matter more than literal wording, and sometimes improving Wikipedia requires making exceptions. Be bold but not reckless in updating articles. And do not agonize over making mistakes: every past version of a page is saved, so mistakes can be easily corrected. It is striking that in connection with this pillar Wikipedia should provide an additional explanation of ‘What Wikipedia is not’. Notability and neutrality are two of the points that tend to be interpreted most diversely by those who find that these policies are applied to their modifications. Notability
This is a topic of discussion and lengthy arguments – a sort of entelechy built of various conceptions and reasoning. If Wikipedia’s notability...
