As
Alice Marwick explains in her article, zines gave rise to e-zines in the
dot-com era. Zines were an alternative media format that substituted magazines
and television shows. Marwick explains how many of the statements made about
zines are comparable to blogs and YouTube videos. Unlike magazines, zines in
the 80s and 90s did not contain any advertisements, and were produced for
purer, personal reasons. Zines could be self-published by whoever wanted to
take the time to cut, paste and create the item, and spread the word about
whatever information was contained within it. Rather than subscribing to zines,
few copies were often produced and then passed on to new readers for
circulation. Zines were part of a counter culture, and defied the norms of
their era. They were non-hierarchally constructed and read by ‘prosumers’,
meaning that individuals who produced the zines were also the consumers of the zines.
YouTube
videos and blogs have become a large part of our daily lives. According to an
article, YouTube has over 490 million different users per month. Not to mention
we spend approximately 2.9 billion hours on the site each month. In my opinion, when YouTube was first launched in 2005, the videos on the site
may have been comparable to zines, considering they were all produced by
independent users, and were produced for the, at the time, small YouTube
community. YouTube videos were all created for mainly personal interest, as a
way for individuals to share moments and experiences with other users. Since
large corporations have begun to publish YouTube videos, I believe that the
site has become mainstream and continues to move further away from any
alternative media resemblance. Additionally, the site generates most of its
profit from advertisements that viewers are obligated to watch before watching their
selected video.
Considering Marwick’s statements above, do you agree or
disagree that YouTube and zines are comparable to each other? Why or why not?
What about blogs (be specific about which ones)?
I definitely think that zines and YouTube videos are comparable as alternative media, but as you've outlined, there are some distinct differences. YouTube's corporate ownership and profit through advertising being one of the most significant differences.
ReplyDeleteHowever, as Marwick argues, both forms of media create consumers who also produce media, and I'd argue these media forms create communities within them. The consumers/"prosumers" are able to follow and communicate with people who are talking about mutual interests; there's an exchange of ideas.
I also think an important distinction between alternative and mainstream media is the idea of censorship. A major feature of YouTube and 'zines is that they are both, for the most part, unmoderated. This means that there can be discussion around matters which are not usually discussed in mainstream media, such as racism, misogyny, classism, and other forms of systemic oppression.
Hi Jenna,
ReplyDeleteGreat read here! I really like the little photo you attached here as well explaining the ins and outs of Alternative Media (I wish I had it when I was in CS333) I would definitely have to agree with you that YouTube is definitely not a form of "Alternative Media" any more seeing as many large corporations, companies in general, small groups and individuals are using YouTube as a platform for reaching out to very large numbers of people. YouTube is also owned by Google which is the world's most widely used search engine. So, I'm sure we can all agree that YouTube can be declared the world's most widely used video search engine.
I do not agree with Marwick in terms of YouTube videos being comparable to zines.
ReplyDeleteA quote comes to mind by Andy Warhol. "In the future, everyone will be world-famous for 15 minutes." Warhol was a well known cultural artist who created art that critiqued mass consumption (Campbell soup cans). YouTube attests to this individualized mass consumption culture which Warhol predicted.
Meanwhile Zines are truly alternative. If one mass produces a zine for advertising or mass consumption, it is no longer a zine,it is just a magazine. Zines are cultural in a way that cant be captured by popular culture. I believe intention behind the publication plays a role as well.
But whereas YouTube has grown and become Advertising City, zines have stayed low-key. Even the ones found on the web.
However, as I said before, the intention behind publication plays a big role. Therefore certain videos may alternative and circulate in certain communities but I am undecided if that makes YouTube an alternative media. So I choose not to choose as I believe in an answer that is somewhere in between.
YouTube and zine are comparable but as you mentioned, YouTube has changed from the integrity of user created content to filled with advertisements, sponsored and subliminal advertising and large corporation marketing their products for free (I think) through their channel. When on YouTube I can honestly not trust the majority of content especially for reviews on products which I enjoyed before without fear of the company sponsoring the YouTuber. Both of the platforms Zine and YouTube have the ability to speak about pop culture and current events as well as making the users famous or viral. They both have power however, YouTube i find is more corporate run with its use of advertisements, data-mining and sponsorship of YouTube stars.
ReplyDelete