Jigsaw Reading: YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN THERE, MAN: LIVE MUSIC, DIY CONTENT AND ONLINE COMMUNITIES by Jessa Lingel and Mor Naaman

One of the other articles I chose to read this week was one on cocncert-goers' video recording and sharing habits. The study was conducted with two populations of DIY concert videographers; one group attending more mainstream concerts at larger venues, and the second group attending smaller, indie concerts in smaller concert venues.

I selected this as one of my jigsaw articles because I enjoy attending concerts and festivals, and to be frank, have always found the people who stand in front of me, experiencing the music through a small, rectangular screen, to be a bit odd. I have always thought that they are missing out on the whole point of seeing music live. So, it was definitely interesting to learn a bit more about these folks who, to me, seem to be disengaged from the whole experience.

It appears that those in the indie video recording community see the sharing of these videos as part of a "gift-giving economy". For example, here is a excerpt from the article: "Jacky described people contacting her through YouTube to request access to her videos. Jacky stated that she complies with these requests on a case-by-case basis: ‘If it's going to be for someone making money off of it, then no [I won’t give access]… I don't mind sharing as long as it's available to everybody.’ These criteria resonate with Lessig’s (2008) comments on gift economies, which are based strictly on non-monetary relationships of exchange."

The authors go on to describe the set of protocols associated with the online videos, including sharing, viewing, rating, commenting on, and monitoring interactions. They then begin discussing the issue of "ownership"; whether the bands own the content or the recorders own the content... " This kind of disconnect of existing legal complexity versus the perceptions of some YouTube users is central to arguments that current legal frameworks are at odds with emergent practices and protocols (Lessig’s, 2008; Sinnreich, 2010). In van Dijck’s (2009) terms, current legal codifications of ownership are inadequate for describing or coping with the complications at work in convergence culture’s construction of user agency." Personally, I feel that while the videographer recorded the performance, the artist is still the owner of that performance.... not the fan recording it on their iPhone blocking my view of the actual experience... but that's just me:). What do you think?

The main research findings are as follows:

• "Producing content involves management of present experience with future gains, where a reduced enjoyment of the show is balanced by creating a lasting documentation of the event.
• DIY videos in particular are valued for their ability replicate a sense of attending the show. In some cases, these videos are treated as gifts within explicitly non-economic systems of exchange.
• Concert videos provide a point of contact between individual users, fan communities and (at least in some cases) bands."

While the interviewees stated their various reasons for recording the videos, many did indicate a sense of disconnection or removal from the actual concert experience, acknowledging my initial thoughts on those who record video at concerts. I would like to say here that I do not feel the same way about audio tapers. These people are more like the ethnographers of a band... They get there early, set up their mics (often in a designated area), and still enjoy the experience. Just thought I should clarify my thoughts distinguishing the two forms of documenting a concert ;).

Another distinction between the mainstream and indie video recorders is their intent to connect. The mainstream videographers are using the videos to connect with other fans, whereas the indie recorders are also contacting the band members as well through the video media.

All in all, this was an interesting read. It also broadened my thoughts about what research is...and can be!