Talk:Produsage

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ctan9, Dcsimmons, Jacquelineb22, Sawhang.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review from Sara Lueders
CONTENT CLARITY - I feel that the overall clarity of your paper is good. There are some sentences where I feel that you got a bit "wordy". For example, the sentence "The concept blurs the boundaries between passive consumption and active production and the distinction between producers and consumers or users of content has faded, as users also play the role of producers whether they are aware of this role or not" I feel could be reworded to either be 2 shorter sentences or using different vocabulary.

SUBSTANCE - One of my main suggestions would be to expand on your examples section. Even adding one or two more sentances per example I feel would really expand your article and would also give readers an even better example of what produsage is.

STRUCTURE/ORGANIZATION - I think the structure of your article is one of the best aspects of it. I feel that is is broken down in a really easy way for people to understand. Like I mentioned earlier, expanding on the "examples section" would add to the article.

SaraLueders (talk) 04:12, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Content: Good Introduction, I like the way your definition, explanation of the term are very clear and comprehensive. You divide the matter into sub sections which is a good way to organize the matter, this will also make it easier for the audience to understand what you're getting at. Other than the occasional jargon, good sense of style, clear, concise matter.

Structure: Easy to read, adding some examples could help, what about criticism or how has produsage been thought of people other than Axel Bruns?

Sources: References are varied, you are off to a good start here. Why not talk more about how Axel Bruns propagated this term- any applications- if it has any. I think you could easily go bolder with the sources and expand not limiting yourself to the term itself, in fact looking at its application over a broader spectrum. Overall good job! --Sanyad23 (talk) 15:32, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello! I'll be working on this page for a class I am taking. I hope to build upon it! Jacquelineb22 (talk) 17:16, 19 October 2016 (UTC)jacquelineb22

Problems with References List
Reading over the page and the references, I noticed that almost half of the sources cited are either (1) unavailable or (2) unreliable/not credible. The sources that I would like to remove or identify the original source are:

Reference #3 - This source links to a blog post. I don't see the author's credibility, however, they do link to produsage.org, which could be a useful site for our research. Reference #6 - This source appears to be a collection of blog posts, yet Axel Brun's name is listed at the top of the page. It's ambiguous whether the work is by Bruns himself or a blogger. Reference #8 and #9 - Both sources have an error page. The information is no longer there. Reference #10 - This source links only to the abstract of the article. I believe this article may work if we are able to get a copy of the full journal article. Reference #11 - This source links to a blog post. Again, I don't see the author's credibility in stating that the game The Sims is an example of produsage. However, the topic may work if we can find a more credible source.

Let me know your input on the sources listed above. My group and I will get to work on tracking down the sources listed as errors and identifying original sources if no one else disagrees with my comment. Jacquelineb22 (talk) 05:12, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Update: I'm posting a quick update about reference #6. My group found out that reference #6 is actually a credible source because it leads to a blog post written by Axel Bruns. We may now utilize this source in our work and editing the article page. Jacquelineb22 (talk) 17:53, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Common property, individual rewards - Needs further explanation and clarity
I'm working on editing the common property section of this page. I find that this section lacks to answer how individuals gain rewards or why individuals would be motivated to do collaborative work. Also, I think that the tone of the section is too academic for Wikipedia, making it difficult to understand. For example, the following paragraph is currently on the page: "Bruns argues that with the creation of collaborative contents, strict enforcement of conventional intellectual property rights is likely to stifle the palimpsestic collaboration of users to work on the materials of their predecessors. On the other hand, completely discharging all materials created in the public domain would be refusing the produsers the acknowledgement and recognition of their work.[6] Thus an alternative to imposing intellectual property recognition is needed for a produsage site to function.[5] Bruns states that a produsage content is treated as common property and that each constructive contributor will be able to receive individual reward from their collaboration. " The paragraph is loaded with academic language that makes it difficult to read. I suggest changing this paragraph to the following: "Bruns states that when individuals engage in collaborative work, enforcing intellectual property rights may hinder them from editing or working on their peers' work. As a result, an alternative method for imposing intellectual property rights is needed in order for produsage to function efficiently. In addition, Bruns states that produsage content is treated as common property and that each contributor receives individual merit and reward for their contributions."

My suggestion shortens the original paragraph into a simpler paragraph. Please suggest any other ways to better this paragraph. In the mean time, I will look for a credible source that goes more in depth about common property and individual rewards. In particular, how individuals gain merit or why individuals would be motivated to do collaborative work. Jacquelineb22 (talk) 18:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC) —

Further Expansion on Common Property: I added a second source (a journal article by Axel Bruns) detailing the importance of low barriers in order for a community to engage in produsage. I think that this point is missing from the paragraph already on the produsage page, along with issues of legal and technical restrictions. Also, I elaborated on how individuals gain rewards from produsage as explained by Axel Bruns. Please read my revised paragraph below and recommend any suggestions or edits to improve it before I edit the Wikipedia page.

In the book, "Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond. From Production to Produsage," Axel Bruns describes the connection between common property and individual rewards within produsage. He states that participation in produsage is motivated by the ability of individual produsers to contribute to a shared purpose. He states that this shared purpose is represented in the ability of produsage to create motivation among produsers and that the content being worked upon remains accessible and open to everyone. Bruns claims that in order for a diverse community to contribute and engage in produsage, there must be few obstacles that would hurdle their contributions. He states that there must be plentiful and accessible existing content available for produsers to edit and contribute to, along with minimal obstacles that involve technical and legal restrictions. [2] For example, Axel Bruns states that when individuals engage in collaborative work, enforcing intellectual property rights may hinder them from editing or working on their peers' work. As a result, an alternative method for imposing intellectual property rights is needed in order for produsage to function efficiently. Therefore, he argues that we may need to declare existing content as common community property, such as through a Creative Commons license. Any content that is worked upon by a community must remain easily accessible and that edits or modifications to the content must be available under similar conditions. In addition, any contributions made by participants to the shared content must be rewarded and recognized whenever appropriate.

As a result, Axel Bruns adds that although the content is shared communally, produsers still gain personal merit from their own contributions to the project being worked upon. In addition, these individual rewards are a source for further motivation for participation by the community in produsage projects. He explains that such personal merit, honors the individual by adding to their network of relationships and those beyond the community. Therefore, the main reward in engaging in produsage is personal status, rather than financial gain. Jacquelineb22 (talk) 19:45, 9 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I think you succeeded in including the information that was lacking in this section! I don't think you need to start of with "in the book ..." and then go on to state the title because you are already referencing it. I also don't think it's necessarily to have, "Bruns states this, Bruns said that" on new sentences that reinforce the same point.Ctan9 (talk) 07:29, 16 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your suggestion Ctan9! I revised my paragraphs below:


 * Axel Bruns describes the connection between common property and individual rewards within produsage. He states that participation in produsage is motivated by the ability of individual produsers to contribute to a shared purpose. This shared purpose is represented in the ability of produsage to create motivation among produsers and that the content being worked upon remains accessible and open to everyone. In order for a diverse community to contribute and engage in produsage, there must be few obstacles that would hurdle their contributions. There must be plentiful and accessible existing content available for produsers to edit and contribute to, along with minimal obstacles that involve technical and legal restrictions. For example, Axel Bruns states that when individuals engage in collaborative work, enforcing intellectual property rights may hinder them from editing or working on their peers' work. As a result, an alternative method for imposing intellectual property rights is needed in order for produsage to function efficiently. Therefore, he argues that we may need to declare existing content as common community property, such as through a Creative Commons license.


 * However, any attempt from individuals or groups within or outside of the produsage group to capitalize on the content of information shared must be avoided. Any content that is worked upon by a community must remain easily accessible and that edits or modifications to the content must be available under similar conditions. In addition, any contributions made by participants to the shared content must be rewarded and recognized whenever appropriate.


 * Although the content is shared communally, produsers still gain personal merit from their own contributions to the project being worked upon. In addition, these individual rewards are a source for further motivation for participation by the community in produsage projects. Such personal merit honors the individual by adding to their network of relationships and those beyond the community.  Therefore, the main reward in engaging in produsage is personal status, rather than financial gain. Jacquelineb22 (talk) 16:10, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Great revision of paragraph! One small note, you cannot use "hurdle" as a verb the way you do. Try "impede" or "constitute a hurdle to." (And, FYI, in your explanation above, you use the word/adjective "concise" as a verb. It would make a great verb, but it is not part of our formal English lexicon yet!)Cathygaborusf (talk) 02:13, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

Hello Cathygaborusf! Thank you for your advice. I've revised my paragraph to take into account your suggestions:

Axel Bruns describes the connection between common property and individual rewards within produsage. He states that participation in produsage is motivated by the ability of individual produsers to contribute to a shared purpose. This shared purpose is represented in the ability of produsage to create motivation among produsers and that the content being worked upon remains accessible and open to everyone. In order for a diverse community to contribute and engage in produsage, there must be few obstacles that would impede their contributions. There must be plentiful and accessible existing content available for produsers to edit and contribute to, along with minimal obstacles that involve technical and legal restrictions. For example, Axel Bruns states that when individuals engage in collaborative work, enforcing intellectual property rights may hinder them from editing or working on their peers' work. As a result, an alternative method for imposing intellectual property rights is needed in order for produsage to function efficiently. Therefore, he argues that we may need to declare existing content as common community property, such as through a Creative Commons license.

However, any attempt from individuals or groups within or outside of the produsage group to capitalize on the content of information shared must be avoided. Any content that is worked upon by a community must remain easily accessible and that edits or modifications to the content must be available under similar conditions. In addition, any contributions made by participants to the shared content must be rewarded and recognized whenever appropriate.

Although the content is shared communally, produsers still gain personal merit from their own contributions to the project being worked upon. In addition, these individual rewards are a source for further motivation for participation by the community in produsage projects. Such personal merit honors the individual by adding to their network of relationships and those beyond the community. Therefore, the main reward in engaging in produsage is personal status, rather than financial gain. Jacquelineb22 (talk) 16:01, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Fluid heterarchy and holoptism
The paragraph on fluid heterarchy and holoptism is wordy and some points do not correlate. The sentence "For example, administrators can be chosen at random or chosen based on seniority in terms of the amount and quality of their existing contributions" and "Community leaders or administrators are thus chosen based on merits and only tentative. " appears to have discontinuity. In Axel Bruns's book he does not mention seniority as a factor in distribution of power or control over produsage sites. I would remove one of the sentences entirely so as not to repeat ideas talked about in the same paragraph and write, "For example, administrators or community leaders and chosen tentatively based on the merits of existing contributions". It should also be made known that in order to maintain a leadership role in the community, contributors have to make relevant contributions regularly as inactivity will result in removal of the leadership role.

Further down, panopticism is mentioned as "a few leaders watch over the production process" but doesn't specifically mention what holoptism is about. It should be mentioned that holoptism is the complete transparency and availability of information between all participatory members in a heterarchical structure, and that holoptism is the direct opposite of panopticism. Ctan9 (talk) 01:20, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I have re-written the section on Fluid Heterarchy and Holoptism as "Another characteristic of a produsage environment is that there should not be a clear hierarchy or centralized leadership in place. Bruns identifies the balance of governance in produsage sites as fluid heterarchies organized through ad hoc meritocracies. In order for produsage sites to function, they need to attract a large number of participants thus the need for balancing between open participation of the users and a sense of cohesion without being oversight by other individuals. [6] This means that governance is not formalized but based on an ad hoc principle of a heterarchical regime. For example, administrators or community leaders and chosen tentatively based on the merits of existing contributions. An 'ad hoc' or temporary 'benevolent dictator' may also arise from the community with limited power through a voting system. [4] Leadership is recognized as long as they respect the heterarchical power structure of the produsage model. [1] The position granted to these leaders is not permanent, power diminishes if the leader does not make constant contributions to the community. [4] While traditional corporate production is based on the top down model of panopticism, where a few leaders watch over the production process, the produsage model employs a horizontal model of holoptism. [7] This dictates that information must be available to all users and participants, and any contributions are watched over by the whole community, which eliminates uncertainty and ambiguity.

I would appreciate any feedback on this edit. Ctan9 (talk) 19:42, 11 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I think that you did a great job at cutting down the wordiness of the original paragraph and connecting the points together. However, I don't think that the everyday wikipedia reader may be familiar with the words holoptism and panopticism. I think it would be best to define these words before using them in the paragraph. What do you think? Jacquelineb22 (talk) 03:00, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Unrestricted access and temporary merit-based leadership

Large numbers of participants, who comply with the features of produsage, are a part of successful produsage sites. Produsage models need to be available to participants of all skill levels and abilities. Axel Bruns notes that while there may be disproportionate levels of contributions, produsers have to feel unrestricted and granted equal access to make contributions. A balance of structure and openness is required in produsage communities. Oversight by small groups can create unwanted control and absolute freedom disrupts cohesion. In order to achieve this balance, produsage communites elect leaders based on the quality of contributions made. In the case for some newer sites, however, moderators of communities may arise at random or the earliest member.

The leadership structure in produsage communities are, as Axel Bruns puts it, in "constant flux." Power diminishes if leaders become idle. As such, leaders are not only encouraged to make relevant contributions to the community, but are also expected to do so with consistency. The fluctuation and redistribution of leadership creates a flexible, fluid network of produsers. Axel Bruns states that the fluidity of structure allows for individuals or tiny groups to emerge as decision makers, rather than having the whole community's approval at every stage. Standard models of structures consist of a top down model where leaders overlook, and have the final say in content creation. Produsage sites, instead, opt for an all-access model where participants are granted transparency. Leadership in this model removes command and control over participants; allowing produsers to make contributions as they see fit. Communities within produsage sites form through common interest of individuals, resulting in leadership rising from within these groups. The constant granting of leadership produces a community driven site where the community decides the direction the site is heading.

Upon further inspection of Axel Bruns's book, Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life and Beyond: From Production to Produsage, I feel that the section of Fluid Heterarchy and Holoptism is lacking in depth. Axel Bruns is most thorough about the description in his book and I based my re-writing of this section on it. I also removed the terms panopticism and holoptism because they require the need for definitions. I also propose to retitle the description of the characteristic to Unrestricted access and temporary merit-based leadership for a more laymen understanding of Fluid Heterarchy and ad hoc meritocracies as in Bruns's book. I could also use some assistance with the references.

I appreciate any feedback on this. Thank you. Ctan9 (talk) 07:13, 16 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Your revised paragraph is much easier to read and understand! I think you greatly improved the wordiness and clarity of the original paragraph. I agree that you should retitle the section to "Unrestricted access and temporary merit-based leadership" because it clearly describes Brun's ideas without utilizing jargon. Jacquelineb22 (talk) 16:22, 16 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree with Jacquelineb22. You did a great job making this section less scholarly and more consistent with the encyclopedia-like tone. I like how you took out the words panopticism and holoptism. I agree that these terms might not be understood by the average Wikipedia user.Sawhang (talk) 05:50, 17 November 2016 (UTC)


 * After re-reading your revision, I would suggest that you change the word "required" to "expected" or "encouraged" in the following sentence: "As such, leaders not only required to make relevant contributions to the community, but also required to do so with consistency." You describe that the leadership positions in a produsage model are constantly shifting. This means that not all leaders maintain their high statuses. The consistency and usefulness of their contributions are, therefore, expectations rather than requirements. Since the produsage model lacks a hierarchy, there is no one figure or group to enforce this requirement. As Axel Bruns (2008) states in Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage, "... being subject to evaluation by potentially any one of their fellow participants encourages them to be particularly careful and diligent in their contributions if they wish to retain their status in the community" (p. 25). By using the word "expected" or "encouraged," you are implying that the participants interact as peers, without one having a predetermined, hierarchical position over the other. Sawhang (talk) 06:03, 18 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for pointing out this crucial implication. I agree with your suggestion completely.Ctan9 (talk) 01:17, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

I have multiple suggestions, big and small. As for the small. I just went ahead and made grammar/punctuation edits to the most recently revised paragraph. As for the big, NO, do not eliminate the terms "Fluid heterarchy and holoptism." Those are Bruns's original terms and must be represented in this article. You can however, note that those are Bruns's word and use your own terms as well. Something like, "his terms might be thought of as unrestricted access and temporary, merit-based leadership," then launch into your excellent paragraph. A few more questions: are any parts of this paragraph direct quotes, like citation #3 or "constant flux"? If not, no problem. If so, use quotation marks.Cathygaborusf (talk) 02:35, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

Fluid heterarchy, ad hoc meritocracies

Large numbers of participants, who comply with the features of produsage, are a part of successful produsage sites. Produsage models need to be available to participants of all skill levels and abilities. Axel Bruns notes that while there may be disproportionate levels of contributions, produsers have to feel unrestricted and granted equal access to make contributions. A balance of structure and openness is required in produsage communities. Oversight by small groups can create unwanted control and absolute freedom disrupts cohesion. In order to achieve this balance, produsage communites elect leaders based on the quality of contributions made. In the case for some newer sites, however, moderators of communities may arise at random or the earliest member.

The leadership structure in produsage communities are, as Axel Bruns puts it, in "constant flux." Power recedes if leaders become idle. As such, leaders are not only encouraged to make relevant contributions to the community, but are also expected to do so with consistency. The fluctuation and redistribution of leadership creates a flexible, fluid network of produsers. Axel Bruns states that the fluidity of structure allows for individuals or tiny groups to emerge as decision makers, rather than having the whole community's approval at every stage. Standard models of structures consist of a top down model where leaders overlook, and have the final say in content creation. Produsage sites, instead, opt for an all-access model where participants are granted transparency. Leadership in this model removes command and control over participants; allowing produsers to make contributions as they see fit. Communities within produsage sites form through common interest of individuals, resulting in leadership rising from within these groups. The constant granting of leadership produces a community driven site where the community decides the direction the site is heading.

Open Participation
I am working on editing "Open Participation" to make it more congruent with the encyclopedia-like tone of Wikipedia. There are two sentences in particular that are wordy, vague, and difficult to understand. The first problematic sentence is: "The produsage environment often encourages collaborative engagement by having preconfigured tools or architectural structures that enables an open discussion about the material." Neither the "preconfigured tools" nor "architectural structures" were explained prior to this sentence, making it confusing to understand. Moreover, this sentence references a blog, calling into question it's credibility. I would, therefore, suggest taking out this sentence entirely.

The second problematic sentence is: "Participation in a produsage model is also voluntary, and task selection is organized on a modularization of granular tasks that can be self-selected rather than as a predetermined division of labor." This single sentence stands as a separate paragraph without any further elaboration. It almost seems as if it were thrown in last minute without much thought. I would suggest rewording this sentence and also elaborating on the idea that the participants become leaders of a produsage model: "Participation in a produsage model is also voluntary. Unlike a hierarchical community, there is no predetermined division of labor, but rather self-selected and voluntary tasks. Participants make contributions—concepts, ideas, and suggestions—that are regarded as either usable and relevant or unusable and irrelevant by other participants. Those participants who make usable and relevant contributions will gain leadership statuses amongst their peers within the produsage community. Their worthy contributions will be further evaluated and developed by the other participants. Thus, the structural organization of a produsage model is non-hierarchical and network-centric."

Finally, this section does not touch on why the number of participants in a produsage model is key to the quality control of the information—a significant point in Axel Brun's book Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage. I would suggest adding: "The more participants there are collaborating in a produsage model, the higher quality the outcome will be—since there are more people examining, evaluating, and criticizing each other's contributions." Sawhang (talk) 08:32, 9 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I think you did a good job at editing the original paragraph and utilizing an encyclopedia-like tone. Your edits are also much easier to understand and remove the jargon from the original paragraph. However, I wonder if Axel Brun's discusses any limitations regarding having too many participants in a produsage model. For example, does he have a limit on how many people can participate? Jacquelineb22 (talk) 03:27, 16 November 2016 (UTC)


 * That is a good point. Axel Bruns states in his book Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage that the produsage model encourages as many participants as possible to participate in order to achieve a high quality outcome. I will add this idea into my section.138.202.1.90 (talk) 18:06, 16 November 2016 (UTC)Sawhang (talk) 18:08, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

My group members and I found that reference #6, "idc texts: Some Exploratory Notes on Produsers and Produsage" is actually a blog written by Axel Bruns; therefore, we do believe it is a credible source. I have rewritten the first problematic sentence to make it less wordy and more understandable. We would like to know what others think about the credibility of reference #6. Please let us know what you think. Sawhang (talk) 19:08, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

This is the entire "Open Participation" section rewritten:

A key characteristic of produsers is that they collaborate to create content rather than working as individuals. The creation of a content is frequently done by a number of different users rather than a single author. The Produsage model provides tools that are designed and adapted to encourage open discussion. An example of this discussion feature is the Wikipedia Talk Page, which facilitates an open discussion between users in evaluating the quality of work created by previous users.

Participation in a produsage model is also voluntary. Unlike a hierarchical community, there is no predetermined division of labor, but rather self-selected voluntary tasks. Participants make contributions—ideas, comments, and edits—that are considered either usable and relevant or unusable and irrelevant by other participants. The contributions that tend to be further evaluated and developed are the relevant and usable ones, while the irrelevant and unusable ones tend to be ignored. Those participants who consistently make relevant contributions will be viewed as leaders amongst their peers. In order to achieve increasing quality in the outcomes, a large community of participants is encouraged, so that there are more people assessing, critiquing, and analyzing the existing contributions. Therefore, the structural organization of a produsage model is collaborative and participatory.

I am a slightly concerned that this does not satisfy the encyclopedia-like tone of Wikipedia. Please let me know if there is anything I should change, add, or subtract.Sawhang (talk) 22:27, 16 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Good job making this characteristic more concise and more organized! My suggestions are: I think your opening sentence should be, a key characteristic of produsage is a collaboration between produsers to create content rather than working as individuals. The characteristic of collaboration is central to the produsage model, and while produsers need to feel able to be collaborative, not all are. Also, to avoid repetition, I feel the sentence, "Participants make contributions—ideas, comments, and edits—that are considered either usable and relevant or unusable and irrelevant by other participants" could be changed to, "The community then considers the usefulness and relevancy of the contributions -- ideas, comments, and edits -- made by participants". That way in your following sentence you don't repeat usable and relevant, and unusable and irrelevant. Ctan9 (talk) 00:40, 17 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the suggestions! I took Ctan9’s proposals into consideration and altered the wording of those two sentences. I also added a couple of important points that Axel Bruns brings up in his book Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage. First, no matter how substantial or insubstantial a relevant contribution may be, it still contributes to the quality of the outcome. Second, Axel Bruns stresses that inclusivity is highly encouraged in produsage models as it also increases the quality of the overall project. He also points out that collaboration with other organizations is key to creating a well-rounded project. This is my entire section revised:


 * A key characteristic of produsage is a collaboration between produsers to create content rather than working as individuals. The creation of content is frequently done by a number of different users rather than one single author. The produsage model provides tools that are designed and adapted to encourage open discussion. An example of this discussion feature is the Wikipedia Talk page, which facilitates an open discussion between users in evaluating the quality of work created by previous users.


 * Participation in a produsage model is also voluntary. Unlike a hierarchical community, there is no predetermined division of labor, but rather self-selected and voluntary tasks. The community considers the usefulness and relevancy of the contributions—ideas, comments, and edits—made by participants. The contributions that tend to be further evaluated and developed are the relevant and usable ones, while the irrelevant and unusable ones tend to be ignored. Even though the substantiality of useful contributions may vary drastically, they all positively contribute to the overall quality of the project. The participants who consistently make worthy contributions will be viewed as leaders amongst their peers.


 * Bruns also states that there is usually unrestricted access to most produsage models. An unlimited number of participants, allows more people to assess, critique, and analyze the existing contributions, increasing the quality of the outcome. In this sense, inclusivity is highly encouraged while exclusivity is highly discouraged. Bruns also brings forth the point that it is beneficial for the community to interact with other organizations, as it broadens the range of knowledge in which they can use to formulate a more impactful message. Therefore, the overall organizational structure of a produsage model is based on collaboration, participation, and inclusivity. Sawhang (talk) 07:08, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Great peer-to-peer feedback here! Great paragraph! Only one note: once you have introduced Axel Bruns by his full name (and included a link to his Wikipedia page Axel Bruns (scholar), you can just use his last name.Cathygaborusf (talk) 02:43, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf


 * Thank you for the suggestion Cathygaborusf! I have edited the paragraph above. Axel Brun's full name is introduced in the lead of the article; therefore, I replaced his full name with his last name in the open participation section.Sawhang (talk) 20:30, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Lead
Do you guys think the lead of the article should be expanded? There is definitely some rewording to be done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcsimmons (talk • contribs) 19:34, 10 November 2016 (UTC) Dcsimmons (talk) 17:19, 18 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I definitely think the lead of the article can be expanded and reworded more clearly. What specific changes do you suggest to edit the lead? So far, I like the content that is in the lead, espcially the sentence, "The concept blurs the boundaries between passive consumption and active production. The distinction between producers and consumers or users of content has faded, as users play the role of producers whether they are aware of this role or not." However, I think that the following sentence, "Produsage refers to the type of user-led content creation that takes place in a variety of online environments such as Wikipedia, open source software, and the blogosphere." jumps to quickly into listing examples of produsage without fully defining or giving a preview of the characteristics that fall under produsage. Jacquelineb22 (talk) 17:10, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Examples of Produsage - Lack of Detail and Depth
I'm reviewing the examples of produsage listed in the wikipedia article and I find that instead of merely listing example of produsage, we need to go into depth and explain how these examples illustrate characteristics of produsage. For example, the article states, "Clickworkers a small NASA experimental project that uses public volunteers for scientific tasks" without citing a reference or source. As a result, this may cause readers to become confused on how exactly click workers are an example of produsage because there are no details or credible sources supporting this claim. I think that we should build upon this example and find a credible source that supports this point.

Additionally, I plan on working on adding more depth and credible sources to this section with my group mates. I think that the citizen journalism example is an excellent example of produsage. However, like the other example I mentioned, its lacking depth and support. Therefore, I will work on finding a credible source that illustrators citizen journalism as an example of produsage. Please let me know if you have suggestions or other examples you would like to elaborate on. Jacquelineb22 (talk) 17:23, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Citizen Journalism

I expanded upon explaining how citizen journalism is an example of produsage. Please read my paragraph below and let me know what you think! My goal was to further elaborate on the example and make it easy to understand.

Axel Bruns states that citizen journalism is an example of produsage, in which it relies on its users to work as participants in evaluating, publicizing and responding to news stories. He argues that citizen journalism draws from voluntary contributions from its participants who utilize technology and the Internet to coordinate the process of citizen journalism. Citizen journalism may take place in websites such as Indymedia, Slashdot, OhmyNews, and The Huffington Post. Axel Bruns also expands on the importance of social networking sites, such as Twitter, serving as platforms for citizen journalism to take place.

Commentary on websites like The Huffington Post and Twitter respond to already existing and published news stories. However, Axel Bruns states that it collects and combines these already existing materials and contextualizes them by pointing out new ways for their interpretation and analysis. As a result, he claims that comments compile information by highlighting its implications and are a form of news curation.

In addition, Axel Bruns utilizes Twitter's hashtag system as an example of providing an open and accessible space for individuals to participate in citizen journalism and produsage. When users tag their posts with hashtags, they are enabling for a larger conversation to take place with other Twitter users and further extend the potential number of participants engaging in citizen journalism. The process of news curation is decentralized and shared; Twitter users collaborate on compiling, collaborating and curating information. As a result, Twitter is an online space that allows its users to share, report, and discuss news stories in a collaborative and open group. Jacquelineb22 (talk) 16:22, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

This looks good, my only recommendation is that you make links to all of the examples you list. Also, go to Axel Bruns (scholar) Wikipedia page and make a link back to Produsage.Cathygaborusf (talk) 02:50, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

Thank you Cathygaborusf for that suggestion! We plan on adding links to to all of our examples and link to Axel Bruns' Wikipedia page and produsage page. Jacquelineb22 (talk) 03:34, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Clarity, Grammar and Encyclopedic Tone needs editing in Palimpsest Artifact and Granularity Section
I am editing this section in hopes of fixing major grammar issues and improving upon the clarity and flow of the paragraph, as of now it is very choppy when read and some words and phrases just don't really make sense. The current section about palimpsest artifacts and granularity is written much like an academic essay, so what I am seeking to do is replace much of the current content with an explanation that echoes more of a scholarly and understandable, unbiased tone. Parts of this article was marked as having original research without credit to the author, so these new edits make sure that work which was researched by others than those who are editing this page receive recognition for their ideas. The current content suggest some examples of prod usage media but doesn't expand or even relate how the topic of the section, palimpsest artifact/granularity, relates to those examples. Instead I seek to explain the examples which are already given in the current content in terms of Axel Bruns' explanation.

Here is my edited version of the section Palimpsest Artifact and Granularity:

Axel Bruns, professor at the University of Technology of Australia and creator of the term "produsage," challenges conventional ideas of production and consumerism by offering a perspective of the community in which producers are continually contributing by writing, rewriting, updating and suggesting ways to improve content. Content that is produced by produsers and the medium which holds the content is in a constant state of ongoing modification. Bruns characterizes this constituent factor of produsage as palimpsestic. The exchange of interactions as produsers collaborate, establishes and builds the artifact, which becomes both a source of information as well as an environment where opinions, ideas and revisions are addressed, discussed and refashioned. He specifically points out that the framework and design of Wikipedia, which stands as an example of a holistic palimpsestic artifact in its nature. Bruns describes Wikipedia as being a continual developing process of produser-led expansion of knowledge, which is repeatedly over-written and multi-layered. Since virtually all users can contribute to an existing content, there is always motivation to further improve upon it. He identifies this characteristics as a stigmergic collaboration, where any user can have access to the artifact and add on their contribution to the original mark. Most often, produsage sites offer the architectural tools which enable produsers to record the history of the development of materials, thus users are able to trace back the evaluation of materials through its various stages. An example is the produsage site ccMixter, a community music site using open source multimedia management system to allow users to create music remixes on top of and in replacement of the original track.

In order for a production to be palimpsestic, the goal for its content must be granular. Bruns argues that granularity offers produsers a way to connect and contribute to a source or artifact in a way which is relevant to their background and knowledge. By anchoring multiplicity of viewpoints and interest to one source, content becomes more valuable, accurate and comprehensible, which is often a common goal of sources which provide information. Bruns states it is characteristic of sources which promote produsage to be divisible into different components, each of which can be individually and independently produced by different users. This allows for the accumulation of skills and knowledge from a diverse background, rather than from a concentrated number of producers. Dcsimmons (talk) 18:32, 16 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't think you need to state that Axel Bruns is a professor at the University of Technology of Australia and creator of the term produsage. This sentence sounds more like a sentence that should be part of the lead of the article. However, I think you did a great job at expanding upon the original paragraph and defining palimpsestic and granularity. The original paragraph is too academic in its tone and difficult to understand, but I think your revision combats that issue. Jacquelineb22 (talk) 19:25, 16 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I think you should define the term "palimpsetic" when you use it for the first time. I am not sure if the average Wikipedia user will be familiar with this word and its meaning. Also, I think you should define the term "artifact". I am still uncertain about what the phrase "holistic palimpsestic artifact" means.Sawhang (talk) 20:09, 16 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree with the others' comments. I actually think you should avoid a scholarly tone to this because produsage itself is a fairly new and unknown concept to casual wikipedia users. I think you can do this without losing the ideas behind it.Ctan9 (talk) 01:18, 17 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the suggestions, I took what you have offered and applied it to this new edit, however I am still working on bettering the tone. Dcsimmons (talk) 19:30, 17 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Axel Bruns challenges conventional ideas of production and consumerism by offering a perspective of the community in which producers are continually contributing by writing, rewriting, updating and suggesting ways to improve content. Content that is produced by produsers and the medium which holds the content is in a constant state of ongoing modification. Bruns characterizes this constituent factor of produsage as palimpsestic. Palimpsestic classifies objects as having the quality of being written and rewritten through many instances over time and showing evidence of that change. The exchange of interactions as produsers collaborate, establishes and builds the artifact, which becomes both a source of information as well as an environment where opinions, ideas and revisions are addressed, discussed and refashioned. He specifically points out that the framework and design of Wikipedia, which stands as an example of a holistic palimpsestic artifact in its nature. Artifact, as defined by Bruns, is a source of produser-created content. Bruns describes Wikipedia as being a continual developing process of produser-led expansion of knowledge, which is repeatedly over-written and multi-layered. Since virtually all users can contribute to an existing content, there is always motivation to further improve upon it. He identifies this characteristics as a stigmergic collaboration, where any user can have access to the artifact and add on their contribution to the original mark. Most often, produsage sites offer the architectural tools which enable produsers to record the history of the development of materials, thus users are able to trace back the evaluation of materials through its various stages. An example is the produsage site ccMixter, a community music site using open source multimedia management system to allow users to create music remixes on top of and in replacement of the original track. Dcsimmons (talk) 19:30, 17 November 2016 (UTC)


 * In order for a production to be palimpsestic, the goal for its content must be granular. Bruns argues that granularity offers produsers a way to connect and contribute to a source or artifact in a way which is relevant to their background and knowledge. By anchoring multiplicity of viewpoints and interest to one source, content becomes more valuable, accurate and comprehensible, which is often a common goal of sources which provide information. He states it is characteristic of sources which promote produsage to be divisible into different components, each of which can be individually and independently produced by different users. This allows for the accumulation of skills and knowledge from a diverse background, rather than from a concentrated number of producers. Dcsimmons (talk) 19:29, 17 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I plan on expanding the explanation of how ccmixter is an example of palimpsest artifacts and granularity. Dcsimmons (talk) 17:59, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I want to expand a little more on this section but I am not sure what I should expand on...any ideas? Dcsimmons (talk) 18:11, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I have some suggestions and some questions. Why expand on the example of ccMixter? Why not expand on the example of Wikipedia, which is a palimpsest you are familiar with and have used? In fact, I think you should bring back/keep the original sentence with the quote from Bruns about Wikipedia being a kind of palimpsest. I think you should use that sentence for two reasons: 1) that allows you to use the noun form of the word (palimpsest) and link to its Wikipedia page -- that means you will not have to cite another encyclopedia, which is kind of bad form, I think, citing one encyclopedia in another encyclopedia, and 2) that allows you to include a direct quote from Bruns and bring up the example of Wikipedia.Cathygaborusf (talk) 04:01, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

Thank you Professor Gabor! I did speak to some of my group members and we decided to delegate the task of expanding on wikipedia further in the examples section, as for expansion in this section, I will leave up to future editors to improve upon. Changes as far as linking palimpsest to wikipedia and bringing Bruns' quote in will be done in the published version of this section. Thank you for your help. Dcsimmons (talk) 23:40, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Further Elaboration of ccMixter and Flickr Examples
All of the examples listed in the example section are good examples of produsage however, they do not elaborate on HOW the source is an example of produsage. I am to elaborate on the example of ccMixter as well as Flickr. Both these examples are different in that ccMixter is a source which provides music and Flickr provides a space for produsers to share photographs.Dcsimmons (talk) 06:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Here is my proposed edit for ccMixter :

→ccMixter, a collaborative music software which enables produsers to upload original music as well as remix and remake tracks uploaded by other users. All music which is upload is governed under the Creative Commons license, which therefore allows every user to access all music without limitations. Bruns describes ccMixter as a source of content that encourages users to participate in both uploading original music as well as remixing other's tracks, and that these tracks which are remixed become a palimpsest artifact, constantly rewritten and edited. Dcsimmons (talk) 06:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

→→Flickr, a photo-editing and photo-sharing site which also enables users to be a part of communities or 'pools' which are made of other users with common interests. Bruns explains that users engage in interaction by commenting on and coediting photographs, which they call "mashups." These mashups are considered common property and are composed of user-led creative content which is continually edited and reedited by users through open participation. Dcsimmons (talk) 06:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

These expansions look greatCathygaborusf (talk) 04:02, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

Inclusion of Fan Fiction in examples of produsage and elaboration of Clickworkers
I would like to include Fan Fiction in the list of examples of produsage section because Axel Bruns highlights it in his book, "Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage".

Fan Fiction communities such as Sugar Quill represent produsage models in text. The collaborative efforts of the community to examine the relevancy and possibility of seamless integration of these fan-written stories into the fictional universe they are fans of, and in some cases collectively write a piece of fan fiction. The communal evaluation of the community fosters a collective sense of ownership of a piece of work that goes through regular revisions. As no one person has more say over the quality of the story, this displays the heterarchical model of produsage in place.

Clickworkers a small NASA experimental project that uses public volunteers for scientific tasks. Enthusiasts with different levels of skill were engaged to identify craters on Mars. These science hobbyists accurately identified Mars craters with professional precision. While there is a division between NASA and the engaged participants, Bruns acknowledges that power dynamics are not disregarded in produsage models but are accepted when the there is mutual benefit. Ctan9 (talk) 23:06, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Great!Cathygaborusf (talk) 04:03, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

Elaboration of Open-Source Software and Inclusion of YouTubeMashups as an Example of Produsage
As Dcsimmons previously mentioned, the "Examples of Produsage" merely list examples without sufficiently explaining what they are and why they are considered models of produsage. I am attempting to elaborate on the open-source software example and include a YouTubeMashups example. In Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage, Axel Bruns explains how YouTube facilitates the emergence of produsage communities.

YouTube, a site in which users upload, share, comment on, and collaboratively evaluate videos, is another example of a produsage community. Participation within the YouTube community is unrestrained and open to the public. Videos and content that already exist on mainstream media are often remixed and edited to form new versions known as "YouTube mashups." Both the remixing activities and comment feature allow users to communally explore new forms of art and genres of music.

Open-source software is a computer software in which the copy right holder allows the source code to be openly available for anyone to alter, edit, or enhance it. The software is in a state of continuous evolution as produsers collaborate to improve the existing source code and/or repair any defects. Through open participation and communal evaluation, the quality of the open-source software advances at a much more rapid rate than that of a closed model.

Please let me know what you think of my elaboration of open-source software and inclusion of YouTube mashup. Do you think I am thorough enough in my explanations? Do I successfully explain why the examples are considered a produsage model? Thank you.Sawhang (talk) 05:35, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Given the length of the other expansions, I think yours is enough. If other editors want to add more, they can.Cathygaborusf (talk) 04:04, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

Sub-section of more current produsage examples
The existing examples of produsage are those explicitly mentioned by Axel Bruns in his book or other journals. I propose including a sub-section within the Examples of Produsage header of more current examples that Bruns has not previously mentioned.

Photoshop contest like the ones held in reddit thread photoshop battles is a popular instance of produsage. Users upload photos which the community is encouraged to edit. Similar to Flickr, all users have equal access to the image which they can then upload back onto the thread where comments are left, and re-edits will continue to take place. Ctan9 (talk) 23:36, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Internet memes like those popularized on Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest, and other social media websites demonstrate another occurrence of produsage. An internet meme is an image, video, or hashtag that portrays a cultural idea, symbol, and/or behavior pattern via the internet. People often create memes by reworking existing photos or videos that others have previously posted. Participants of social media platforms often comment on, share, or re-edit these internet memes.Sawhang (talk) 06:43, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Two more good expansions. Can you find CreativeCommons images of either of these? Not necessary, just wonderingCathygaborusf (talk) 04:06, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

Instagram as a Modern Example of Produsage
I seek to add a more recent example of produsage in action, as I have already elaborated on example specifically given be Axel Bruns. A new modern example of prod usage which is very common today is the social network app Instagram. Below is an explanation of how Instagram is a modern example of Axel Bruns' theory of produsage. Dcsimmons (talk) 06:13, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Instagram : As technology advances and more complex apps are developed, user have access to more information and more ways of sharing and contributing to a community. One example of this modern content exist within Instagram, which is a photo and video sharing app that enables produsers to both post images which is then shared to either the public or selected users, as well as save/screenshot, remake and repost other users content. An example of this within the app is signified by what is called "memes," which are parody revisions of previously posted images/animations. Instagram creates and promotes a produsage environment, where access is only limited to having a smart device, open participation is encouraged, users feel motivated to post interesting images as well as absorb and recreate content uploaded by other users.Dcsimmons (talk) 06:13, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Applications of Produsage Through Media Convergence
Myself as well as Jacquelineb22 are working on developing a new section in which will entail how the theories of Media Convergence (Henry Jenkins) overlap with the theory of Produsage (Axel Bruns). I have done some research on both theories and I am now in the process of writing up a paragraph or two explaining how they connect and overlap. Dcsimmons (talk) 06:55, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Here, below I will post my notes from Henry Jenkin's speech How Content Gains Meaning and Value in a Networked Culture which is posted on Youtube for other group members to see although they are rough notes and my final piece has not yet been formulated. Dcsimmons (talk) 06:55, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Media Convergence --> "Systematic spread/dispersal of information" - Henry Jenkins Produsage --> Spread of ideas, culture, revisions through content

-People are connecting and engaging in stories -Transmedia and fan participation -Grassroots appropriations (remakes of glee) - Henry Jenkins -"Participations by users enhances company knowledge" -Henry Jenkins

-People are given things to do through media
 * "Content is participatory" - Henry Jenkins
 * wikipedia is a participatory culture - Henry Jenkins
 * fan fiction is participatory culture - Henry Jenkins

Meaning of "content is participatory" -- "Low barriers for participation" Henry Jenkins -strong support for sharing creations w/ others -informal mentorship (More advanced users help less advanced) -members believe their contribution matters/is important -users care about other's opinions

-"shift in production capability makes it hard to separate grassroots/professional work" - Henry Jenkins -Includes mashups of content
 * Content is remixable -Henry Jenkins

-spreadable media -speed of spread affects participation
 * Content is spreadable - Henry Jenkins

Spreadable media and Politics -politics of spreadable media -"taking entertainment content as a baseline from which to reframe a set of political issues" -Henry Jenkins

-connections of transmedia and prod usage are made globally -anime (from China --> US) e.g -bollywood (from India --> US) e.g
 * Content is global

-"Independent producers have capacity to deal to consumers over corporate" - Henry Jenkins
 * Content may be independent

These are just notes from which I took from a speech which Henry Jenkins gave called How Content Gains Meaning and Value in a Networked Culture. Dcsimmons (talk) 06:55, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Addition to overlapping theories
Sawhang and I would like to include an additional section regarding overlapping theories. The theory of produsage seems to overlap with ideas by Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams. I think this would be a great inclusion to the idea of produsage to help illustrate similarity to models not explicitly mentioned as produsage.


 * I like the follow three paragraphs - they make a lot of sense and nicely explain the overlap with produsage. I find the paragraph above unnecessary; I recommend deleting it.Cathygaborusf (talk) 04:13, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf
 * We agree Cathygaborusf. Thank you for the suggestion. Ctan9 and I have removed the paragraph.Sawhang (talk) 20:30, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams promote "collaborative and social models of learning" as methods for developing a successful "Global Network for Higher Learning." Currently, the teaching model involves professors disseminating information to students to absorb, memorize, and recall on tests; however, Tapscott and Williams urge that true learning occurs when students collaboratively explore and discuss what they are learning about. According to a study done by Richard J. Light at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, the success of students in higher levels of education is dependent on their ability to organize and participate in study groups. Students who formed study groups were more prepared and involved in their coursework and retained more information than those who did not form groups. This resembles Bruns's definition of open participation.

In 1999, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology integrated OpenCourseWare as a way of harnessing information on the internet for students. A project that began in 2002, in 5 years, MIT managed to publish its entire curriculum of lecture notes and exams online. This information is made available for students and teachers, even from other institutions, to be "freely used, copied, distributed, translated and modified". Professors have equal access to OpenCourseWare regardless of the institution they belong to. Tapscott and Williams propose that student users should be able to share their desired education structure with professors. Professors then make curriculum structure decisions based on the advice of the community of students and professors to optimize learning outcomes. Tapscott and Williams suggest that this creates more value for the high cost of education. Unrestricted information made readily available for anyone to use, community interaction between students and professors without hierarchical lines, demonstrates produsage's fluid heterarchy. The degree's regularly updated coursework is also reminiscent of palimpsestic artifacts.

In addition, Tapscott and Williams explain how universities and professors sharing their course materials through OpenCourseWare would allow teachers to globally participate in forming more well-rounded and engaging courses, instead of forming them individually. Since OpenCourseWare freely allows access to everyone, the information shared on this public domain is considered common property. This aligns with the common property characteristic of produsage. The universities and teachers are produsers who are contributing to a shared purpose – improving coursework for the benefit of other teachers and students. Ctan9 (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Applications of Produsage Through Media Convergence
My peers and I thought it would be interesting to add a section which details the overlapping concepts of produsage and media convergence. Media convergence is a concept coined by scholar and professor Henry Jenkins, in which he aims to describe how individuals interact with media today. Within this section I aim to describe the overlapping ideas behind Bruns' produsage and scholar Henry Jenkins media convergence. I look into detail of these theories by breaking both media convergence and produsage into its characteristics and comparing a contrasting them. The first half of the section details how Bruns' idea of open participation and Jenkins' idea of participatory culture overlap. The second half of the section compares and contrasts Bruns' idea of palimpsest artifacts with Jenkins' idea of remixable content. Dcsimmons (talk) 07:31, 29 November 2016 (UTC)


 * For future editors : I think I would be a great idea to further expand upon these concepts by going into more detail about the examples and further explaining each concept. I invite future editors to also find a usable picture of the pepper spray cop to add to this portion of the article. *** Dcsimmons (talk) 07:31, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Axel Bruns' idea of produsage aims to describe how people in this digital age are communicating, through the explanation of four different characteristics; open participation, common property, palimpsest artifact and granularity as well as fluid heterarchy and holoptism. Each characteristic in itself pose a different aspect of what Bruns identifies as produser-led creation of content. Although Bruns' ideas are unique in characteristic, they tend to overlap with existing ideas and theories from other scholars, one of these being media scholar Henry Jenkins, a professor of communication, cinematic arts and journalism at University of Southern California. Henry Jenkins, a long time educator and writer of over nine books, coined the term and concept of media convergence. Media convergence can be described as a process by which media of all mediums are expanded, collaborated, transformed and adapted through space and time. Jenkins describes how the convergence of media occurs through a process in the individuals brain, but what is published by producers and the reactions in which individuals have toward content is the result of this convergence. Jenkins aims to conceptualize how content accumulates meaning and value and how the plethora of platforms of interaction accessible today encourages users to participate in a culture of content which is constantly being reshaped and reworked through digital communication and collective intelligence. Jenkins concept of media convergence overlaps with Bruns' idea of produsage where media convergence can be simply summarized as the logical placement and collaboration of media content, similarly produsage can be defined as the spread of idea, culture and opinions though media. In a speech given at USC, Jenkins speaks about five main concepts; content is participatory, content is remixable, content is spreadable, content is global and content may be independent. Dcsimmons (talk) 07:31, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Henry Jenkins states content is participatory, which means platforms of media provide content which encourages users to interact and participate within its community. He explains that participation require low barriers of for expression where individuals are given things to do through media and often times feel a strong support for sharing their creations with other members. He explains that users are motivated to connect and engage in storytelling which are most often appropriated through grassroots communities. He contends that within participatory culture, there is a system of informal mentorship in which those users who are more advanced mentor those that are either new in participating or rather those that lack the skill set to adequately participate. Jenkins gives the example of Wikipedia and explains that it allows and encourages user-led discussion, modification and recreation. Similarly, Bruns' idea of open participation emphasizes that participation of producers is voluntary and is facilitated through platforms which designed to encourage open discussion therefore, content is created by multiple produsers. He also states that producers believe that their contributions as well as the opinions of other users are important. Both Jenkin's and Bruns' concepts exemplifies that within the new media age, content is no longer created by one producer and consumed by the rest, but rather content is constantly remodeled, recreated and refashioned by multiple users within a open-ended community that encourages contribution and participation by its members. Dcsimmons (talk) 07:31, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Another characteristic of media convergence is the concept of remixable content. Jenkins defines remixable content as the playfulness in which users input and ground their content around; he states that due to the fact that technology is more accessible in this digital age, it becomes less complicated for users to transform content in the way they would like on a variety of different mediums and platforms. Remixable content is a result of users and producers taking ownership of content and reshaping and remixing it for a variety of reasons which may either be for enjoyment or cultural instances. These remixes or mashups of content allow media to be spread over space and time at extremely fast rates which propels the familiarity of the content from user to user. Jenkins uses the example of the series of pepper spray cop remixes in which a picture of a cop pepper spraying a group of protestors was remade through a series of platforms by users all across the nation. Just a few days prior to the first circulating picture, 200 mashups of the pepper spray cop were created. Similarly, Bruns' states that a characteristic of produsage is a palimpsest artifact, which can be defined as content which is written and rewritten over again constantly with the goal of improving upon the source. Both Jenkins and Bruns conceptualize that user contribution is an essential characteristics of new media communication and consumption, in which individuals absorb content and remake or refashion it to either clarify an idea, promote a message or simply for enjoyment. Dcsimmons (talk) 07:31, 29 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I think you did a great job at applying Bruns' theory of produsage to Jenkins' theory of media convergence. I suggest making a link to Jenkins' Wikipedia page as well as media convergence in your published post. I've expanded upon the last three concepts of Jenkins' theory to add to your section.


 * In addition, Jenkins elaborates on the idea that content is spreadable. He states that the spreadability of content is a logic of circulation and that content gains value as it travels through culture. He utilized viral videos as an example to show that individuals who share and spread this content are contributing to increasing its value, whether for potential commercial interests or for entertainment.  As a result, he states that circulation is a grassroots hybrid system and shaped by the individuals from the bottom up who pass along the content by their own choice. This type of spreadability contrasts the traditional type of distribution from corporations who are the main entity distributing content or products. Similarly, Bruns' concept of open participation elaborates on the idea that the more individuals working and collaborating together produces higher quality content. In addition, it emphasis collaboration rather than one individual taking sole ownership of a piece of work. Jenskins' and Bruns' theories compare in that they both value multiple individuals collaborating to improve upon a piece of work or contribute to spreading its content. Jenskins' theory of media convergence values that it requires multiple individuals to work together to spread content throughout culture, while Bruns' theory values the collaborative effort of individuals working together to critique, analyze and reconstruct a piece of work.


 * Jenkins also discuses in his theory that content may be global. As individuals help spread content by sharing it with people within their networks, the content has the opportunity to be shared outside of the original culture it originated from. He utilizes the example of the emergence of anime in the United States to show the power of spreadability in sharing content to different communities and cultures. Anime originally emerged in Japan, however, as anime fans began circulating the content online and informally translated anime shows into English, it spread to audiences in the United States and more Americans be came a part of the anime fan base. As a result, the anime fan base in Japan contributed to the popularization of Anime in a global context and introduced new content to the American marketplace.  In comparison to Bruns' concept of open participation, Jenkins adds on that the spreadability of content may bring new audiences from a global standpoint, thus increasing the number of individuals who are able to participate and engage with the content or product.


 * Lastly, Jenkins characterizes content as independent. He states that while mass producers like corporations may have an advantage over independent producers in regards to visibility, such as indie film makers, independent producers still have opportunities to get their content exposed to the public. For example, he utilizes kick starters as an example of a funding source for independent producers and the creation of their content. Independent producers have the power to appeal to audiences that the heads of corporations or commercial structures are also trying to attract. As a result, in comparison to Bruns' concept of fluid heterarchy, which states that there is a fluid level of leadership in a produser group, independent producers showcase a fluid level of leadership against large corporations because they still have resources and networks to get their content across to their desired audiences.  Jacquelineb22 (talk) 03:48, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Addition to Examples Section - Wikipedia
One of the main examples of produsage that Axel Bruns discusses is Wikipedia. I've written a paragraph about how he utilizes Wikipedia as an example and applies the characteristics of produsage.

Axel Bruns utilizes Wikipedia as an example to illustrate the characteristics of produsage. He states that Wikipedia is a collaborative online encyclopedia and differs from traditional encyclopedias because they only rely on the contributions of credible experts. As a result, traditional encyclopedias exclude participation from the public and lack a diverse group of contributors to engage, analyze and critique the work of the group. However, Wikipedia values the produsage characteristics of open participation by allowing anyone to edit a page on their website. Users are able to start new pages they wish to elaborate on or edit an exising page. In addition, users can read the work of others who have collaborated on a page before and critique or build upon what has already been written on a specific topic. Bruns also points out that Wikipedia embraces the produsage principle of fluid heterarchies. There is no sole leader on a Wikipedia page, thus users are allowed to freely evaluate each other's content. He adds that those who contribute more to a page may have visibility in the community in contrast to those who have lower rates of participation, however, the leadership is always in flux. Jacquelineb22 (talk) 17:15, 30 November 2016 (UTC)