Creating culture through remix

Many of us are accustomed to relying on a retweet, status update, video upload or hyperlink as a means of sharing information. Within this sharing we build communities through common interests, gain acceptance and understanding of others, and experience places that otherwise would always remain foreign to us. These ubiquitous acts allow us to move seamlessly between our two roles of consumer and producer, participating in the production of our culture. Each time we share we view something that is produced we essentially are actively engaged in remix culture. To Knoble and Lankshear (2008) “remix means to take cultural artifacts and combine and manipulate them into new kinds of creative blends” (p. 22).” Perhaps to many of us, it simply means actively using the tools we have available to us in our daily lives.

What to many of us is an obsolete thought is the fact that our use of these tools is in contradiction of the traditional ways in which people were to interact with the media. In the read only culture of the past we simply consumed. (Lessig, 2008). Newspapers, books, television shows and movies were ‘taken in’ - media was served to us. Through this media we defined our culture. Fast-forward to a world filled with digital technology, which “changed how we think about access to culture” (Lessig, 2008). We now not only see culture through what the media gives us, we use media ourselves to create our culture. Each one of us have the ability, if we wanted, to create our culture and we do so without even knowing it. Uploading a movie onto YouTube that was created using iMovie and inserting a song that was downloaded off of iTunes seems nothing more than a few hours work. What we forget is that in the process we accessed information that really didn’t belong to us. Permission wasn’t obtained to use the latest song as background music to accompany personal photos or videos. We simply thought since we have access, we also have permission. And quite frankly even if we knew it may be wrong, the ease of accessibility trumps the feeling of doing something wrong.

Case study: Punjabi culture remixed

Defining culture and traditions

“Culture is the conduit of past to future, the vessel of memory of countless generations of the past to countless generations in the future, an inheritance and a memorial” (Deneen, 2008, p. 65). According to Deneen (2008), culture is the way in which people come together to create meaning, to share values, build a basis by which grief and joy is measured, shared and expressed. How we share the cultural knowledge that we amass is varied through our geography, our tools, our habits and our gender.

Traditions are social constructs used to create identity. Traditions are based on and defined by a group’s past and are fluid enough to change with the group’s current existence. Traditions stem from the embodied cultural capital of the group, Eisendstadt (as cited by Linnekin, 1983) says, “the selection of what is culture is always made in the present; the content of the past is modified and redefined according to a modern significance” (p. 241). Traditions are easily adapted to accommodate the changes in time and place of the group. The content of traditions is “ . . . redefined by each generation and its timeliness may be situationally constructed” (Linnekin, 1983, p. 242).

For first generation Canadians of Punjabi heritage, remix is a way of life. Being Canadian they grow up experiencing what is seen as the ‘mainstream’ way of growing up: watching Sesame Street, joining sports teams at school, juggling homework and figuring out what university or college to attend. Along with this ‘mainstream’ growing up is the culture that many of them experience at home. This culture is vastly different- language, music, food, and cultural norms that perhaps sometimes seem to clash with what the rest of the kids at school are doing. In many ways these two cultures found no way to co-exist. One existed out the home in the public sphere of school/work another inside the home with friends and family of the same origin. New media dramatically changed that.

Music as a means of creating culture

“Far from simply "reflecting" social processes, music provides contexts in which cultural meaning is formulated and negotiated. Among diaspora communities, music is vital for formulating diasporic cultural identity” (Diethrich, 1999, p.39). For the Punjabi community this certainly is true. Music is a way for Punjabis scattered all over the world, to connect back to the heritage and culture that is rooted in India. Often referred to as desi or Punjabi music, for young people, “music is used not only to cross the distance to India, but to create an entirely new space, one that asserts and affirms both aspects of their hyphenated identities” (Diethrich, 1999, p.36).
Today’s music remixes.

According to Shirky (2008), “Our electronic networks are enabling novel forms of collective action, enabling the creation of collaborative groups that are larger and more distributed than at any other time in history” (Shirky, 2008, p.48). Because members are no longer bound by proximity, groups can exist and meet no matter where individual members may reside. This is seen in the Punjabi music scene. Websites such as simplybhangra.com connect Punjabi’s from across North America, Britian and India, all sharing their thoughts on music and it’s cultural significance or impact.

Punjabi Music creating culture

Punjabi musicians teaming up with mainstream North American hip hop artists is one way in which youth see their culture being remixed.



Seeing mainstream North American artists perform their own versions of Indian songs is another way in which youth see their culture literally incorporating two worlds.



The use of Punjabi music at Bhangra competitions is also another way in which remix culture is flourishing. Youth use bhangra music alongside hiphop and pop music to combine energetic routines. The moves in these routines are themselves remixes-choreographing traditional Bhangra (Punjabi dance) with other dance genres without missing a beat.



These competitions not only feature remix through the music and dance, but also through their programs. VIBC, Vancouver International Bhangra Competition is one example where youth are connecting the many cultures that make up their world.

A shift in culture

The challenge comes when these remixes are done without giving permission or credit to the works that are used. Many Punjabi music songs are remixed by artists who sell and produce music as well as by the general public who remix through the use of their laptops-simply because they have the tools and the imagination to do so. Music producers and DJ’s like TigerStyle and create mega hits, seamlessly fusing Indian beats with mainstream music. Their “mix produces the new creative work-the “remix”. (Lessig, 2008, p. 69).



Traditional copyright laws may not be followed because music is being remixed and reproduced without the permission of artists. At an even simpler level, YouTube is inundated with videos of Punjabi music where the slides use movie clips, images of celebrities, without any real sense of permission. Perhaps one of the biggest ironies is that in many cases the artists who have created remixes are now seeing their work remixed by youth. Many of these youth remix simply because they can “access is the mantra of the YouTube generation (Lessig, 2008, p.46).

The issues that exist with this remixing of culture go beyond technology. A shift in the very culture that exists within the Punjabi community is also subject to change. Traditional songs now contain modern themes, beats and lyrics. Events that at one point could be classified simply as Punjabi or Western, are now mixing both. Perhaps as mentioned above this is less of an issue, this is a natural phenomenon-traditions change with time and place. Even further, given that remix is synonymous with so much of what we do, we will simply see it as it is what it is- the world we live in.


Sources

Deneen, P. (2008). Technology, culture, and culture. New Atlantis: A Journal of Technology & Society, 2163-2174. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Diethrich, G. (1999). Desi Music Vibes: The Performance of Indian Youth Culture in Chicago. Asian Music, 31 (1) 35-61. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/834279 (April 7, 2011) .

Lankshear, C. & Knobel, M. (2008). Remix: The Art and Craft of Endless Hybridization. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(1) 22-33. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/30139647 (April 8, 2011) .

Lessig, Lawrence (2008). Remix Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy. New York: The Penguin Press.

Linnekin, S. (1983). Defining traditions: variations on Hawaiian identity. American Ethnologist, (10)2, 241-252.

Shirky, C. (2008). Here Comes Everybody. New York: Penguin Press.

Videos:

Baronroflcopter. (2010, June 8). Jay-Z and Punjabi MC Mundian to bach ke live at Rock am Ring 2010. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOnz35MzlYc&feature=related

Gurrvy. (2008, July 21). Nachna onda nahi. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNIZ8Phmh4U

Ladygagamex. (2009, September 4). The Pussycat Dolls feat. A.R. Rhaman Jai Ho! Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ9_8wxofik&feature=fvst

Redman07. (2010, March 8). Kollaboration 10 Bhangra Empire. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oepvmYWYwU

Sites:


http://www.simplybhangra.com

http://www.tigerstyleonline.co.uk/

http://www.vibc.org

Hockey Fans and Remix Culture

A remix culture, according to Lawrence Lessig, is one where "people participate in the creation and the re-creation of their culture" (Lessig, 2007). It is one where people can use an existing artifact to create something new and unique. Lessig breaks down culture into two categories: read/write culture and read/only culture. This latter culture is one where "creativity [is] consumed but the consumer is not a creator" (Lessig, 2007). A read/write culture is described as being a symbol of individual freedom and personal expression (Lessig, 2005) while a read/only culture "is top-down...where the vocal chords of the millions have been lost" (Lessig, 2007). With the increase in digitization of original work such as art, music and ideas, the remix culture impacts both the creators as well as the consumers.

Examples of remixed work include music sampling, anime fan art and serviceware mashups (Lankshera & Knobel, 2007). People are able to "mashup" (Fitzgerald & O'Brien, 2006) original content with their own alterations and share it as their own. For instance, street artist Banksy uses structures and buildings from around the world as his canvass to express his thoughts and messages (“Banksy - Outdoors”, n.d.). This could be considered vandalism but the art work has gained acceptance and has even led to a film entry at the Sundance Film Festival (Horn & Lee, 2010).

With the cost of computers reducing and image editing software becoming easier to use, photoshopping has become a popular remixing tool for political statements and individual expression. The act of splicing images from different sources together to create a new message and content on the web reflects the remix culture Lessig (2007) refers to. Because of the freedom remix culture demands, it is fundamentally at odds with older media institutions and practices. As demonstrated by photoshopping, the read/write culture does not conform to established and traditional methods of copyright laws, intellectual property rights and publication methods.

CASE STUDY: OILERSNATION PHOTOSHOP CONTEST

OilersNation, a fan website, recently hosted a photoshop contest that invited readers to submit their edited images inspired by the Edmonton Oilers. Original narratives and themes from movies, television shows and advertising are used with Oiler-related images to create new content. Fans expressed their feelings and thoughts regarding the Oilers season, team managements decisions as well as optimism and support for the clubs future. Based on the comments visitors left on the site, one entry was selected to win a prize.

Photoshopping requires some knowledge and experience with the image editing software as well as the intended audience. Editors had to seamlessly mesh hockey images with familiar, pop culture, items so that an explanation was not required. Contest entrants were sharing their works with a hockey fan community, a niche audience, that had to understand their message easily.

The desire of fans to create new content using copyrighted material such as player images and movie posters is a result of the remix culture that exists today. But as this case study demonstrates, there is a tension between the remix culture that encourages the expression of fans and the read/only practices of traditional media institutions.





COPYRIGHT ISSUES


Since the images used by fans in the photoshop contest are not owned by them, fans are technically using the images illegally. The photos of the players are owned by the team, private owners or broadcast mediums such as television networks or websites. But since they are available on the Internet, a medium that supports a remix culture, fans are able to copy, save, edit and share the images.

Original images from movies and television shows are valuable to its owners since they took time, resources and capital to create. Yet, franchises such as Star Wars or Bob the Builder do not appear to have received any reimbursement for the images that were used. But in order for fans to express themselves, they need access to these copyrighted images.

The read/only culture that original material owners demand is protected by copyright laws. As Lessig (2007) states, “By default, read/write use violates copyright law. Read/write culture is thus presumptively illegal”. Lessig urges that government legislation must find a balance that allows for creativity but also compensate artists (Lessig & Schlesinger, 2008). In 2001, Creative Commons (Zittrain, 2009) was established to give creators the ability to copyright their material but also allow for certain uses of their work. Their goal is to allow ones “creative, educational, and scientific content [to be] instantly more compatible with the full potential of the internet” (“About - Creative Commons”, n.d.). It remains to be seen if this organization can bridge the ideological differences, regarding copyright issues, between read/write and read/only culture.

MESSAGE CONTROL

When an individual or organization creates content, it is for their own purposes and objectives. For instance, when a movie is set for release to theatres, images from the film are used for movie posters and advertising. Theses images and their intended messages are controlled by the original artists. Investments are made into the original material in the hopes that it will generate revenue for them. Since remix culture allows anyone to use original content to create something new, tension arises between it and the traditional method of content creation and control.

The fans who photoshopped images are using content that was meant for a different purpose. Images of hockey players were not intended to be mashed with a Star Wars poster or to be mocked. Professional sports, being a business, must carefully invest in the creation of original work to generate revenue. Teams are accountable to investors, a board of governors and corporate sponsors. The messages they create must adhere to the goals of their organization, with external stakeholders in mind. When a fan remixes the original content to create a message that does not represent the organization, legal action may be sought for misrepresentation.

Instead of simply consuming the message an organization such as the Edmonton Oilers create, fans are utilizing social media, or web 2.0. applications (O’Reilly, 2005), to create and share their own messages. The barriers to participate and get things done, according to Shirky (2008), have dropped, allowing fans to participate in the creation and control of content. Social media applications such as blogs, Facebook and Twitter provide a voice to fans, making them a source of information; information that traditionally is under the control of the original creators.

AUDIENCE VS COMMUNITY


The OilersNation photoshop contest demonstrates the evolution of the traditional audience into more of an active community. Instead of being a part of the targeted audience, fans have connected with one another to form a community, which is vital in a remix culture. Without a community to work with and to create content for, there is little motivation for fans to express their thoughts and creativity.

According to Mason (1999), it is the uncertainty of games and player performance that professional sports sells to its audience. Fans in turn buy tickets to events and purchase merchandise. Fans have also demonstrated their desire to not only consume, but to actually do something with the product sold to them by professional sports. Examples include fantasy league pools, where fans select players at the start of the season and collect points to compete with other fans. Phone applications such as Pre Play Sports (“Pre-Play Sports”, n.d.) allow fans to predict events during a live football game and compete with others. Fans have also demonstrated their creative and collaborative abilities by taking the statistics generated by the league and developing their own methods of tracking team and player performance (Staples, 2008). These fans are conducting, what Bruns (2008) describes as, “produsage”, which is the “collaborative and continuous building and extending of existing content in pursuit of further improvement” (p. 15).

The ideologies and characteristics of this participatory culture (Jenkins, 2008) are in stark contrast to those envisioned by creators of original work. The hockey fan community and its remix culture have a different approach to creating content than the read/only audience the Edmonton Oilers may view them as. This leads to tension since the professional sports teams and leagues cannot control how their property is used within this community. It is difficult for them to determine who is using their material and for what purposes. However, In response to the evolution of audiences becoming communities, the Oilers have begun interacting with fans using different social media applications such as Facebook and Twitter. The team can be a part of the fan network, rather than remain as outsiders.

SUMMARY

As demonstrated by the OilersNation photoshop contest, a remix culture is fundamentally at odds with traditional media institutions and practices. Copyright issues, message control and the evolution of audiences to active communities demonstrates the ideological differences between remixers and original creators of work. In the future, the way content and its message is controlled over new mediums requires the involvement of the read/write and read/only culture. A balance must be found to protect the work of original creators, but also provide people the freedom and opportunity to become engaged with their culture.


SOURCES

About - Creative Commons (n.d.). Retrieved from http://creativecommons.org/about. (2011, March 31).

Banksy Outdoors (n.d.) Retrieved from http://www.banksy.co.uk/outdoors/outvarious/horizontal_1.htm. (2011, March 31).

Bruns, A. (2009). Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life and Beyond. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Brustein, J. (2011, March 11). A Better Way to Watch Sports. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/13/weekinreview/13watch.html. (2011, March 25).

Gretz, W. (2011, March 11). Photoshop contest entries: updated. Retrieved from http://oilersnation.com/2011/3/11/photoshop-contest-entries. (2011, March 12).

Horn, J. & Lee, C. (2010, January 24). Sundance 2010: Banksy rocks festival with 'Gift Shop'. LA Times. Retrieved from http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/2010/01/sundance-2010-banksy.html. (2011, March 31).

Jenkins, H. (2006). Fans, Bloggers and Gamers: Exploring Participatory Culture. New York: New York University Press.

Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press.

Lankshear, C. & Knobel, M. (2007, May). Digital Remix: The Art and Craft of Endless Hybridization. Keynote presented to the International Reading Association Pre-Conference Institute "Using Technology to Develop and Extend the Boundaries of
Literacy". Retrieved from http://extendboundariesofliteracy.pbworks.com/f/remix.pdf. (2011, March 28).

Lessig, L. (2005). The people own ideas!. Technology Review, 108 (6). Pp. 46-53.

Lessig, L. (2007, November). Larry Lessig: On laws that choke creativity [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/larry_lessig_says_the_law_is_strangling_creativity.html. (2011, March 30).

Lessig, L. & Schlesinger, R. & (2008). Don't Make Kids Online Crooks. U.S. News & World Report, 145 (14).

Mason, D.S. (1999). What is the sports product and who buys it? The marketing of professional sports leagues. European Journal of Marketing, 33 (3/4). Pp. 402-418.

Fitzgerald, B & O'Brien, D. (2006). Mashups, remixes and copyright law. Internet Law Bulletin 9(2):pp. 17-19. Retrieved from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/4239/1/4239.pdf. (2011, March 30).

O'Reilly, Tim. (2005). “What is Web 2.0?”. Retrieved from: http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html. (2011, March 30).

Pre-Play Sports (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.preplaysports.com/the-app. (2011, March 31).

Rheingold, H. (2002). Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus Books.

Shirky, C. (2008). Here Comes Everybody. New York: Penguin Press.

Staples, D. (2008, October 14). Frequently Asked Questions About True Plus/Minus [Web log]. Retrieved from http://communities.canada.com/edmontonjournal/blogs/hockey/archive/2008/10/14/frequently-asked-questions-about-the-errors-stat.aspx. (2011, March 31).

Zittrain, J. (2009). How to end the copyright wars. Nature, 457 (7227). Pp. 264-265.

IMAGES

Lessig photo: Wikimedia Commons

Street Art: Banksy

OilersNation photoshop entries: OilersNation