Theme 3: User-contributions

POST-IT NOTES FROM JAN WORKSHOP

QUESTIONS/METHODS

CITY STRATA – platform for culture – explored through cinema layer, any layer develop

theatre/performance

Historians are contributors too

– editors

– good data needs expertise

local communities use solomo to promote their own areas and businesses and histories (using cinema as an example)

ECONOMICS – crowd-funding

memory maps, cinema journeys

Oral history/narratives

Genealogy. Family history

Cinephilia – new forms used for exploring old venues.

Events

REFERENCES/FURTHER READING

User-contributions – crowd sourcing, social media, sharing, participatory, local/global, hard/soft interaction

  • Crowd sourcing, participatory, social media, user-generated content, communities of interest (e.g. AHRC workshop on crowd-sourcing)

http://crowds.cerch.kcl.ac.uk/wp-uploads/2012/12/Crowdsourcing-connected-communities.pdf

The conclusion to Stuart Dunn and Mark Hedges’ AHRC Crowd Sourcing Study http://humanitiescrowds.org/ is that “research involving humanities crowd- sourcing can be divided into the four facets of process, asset, task type and output type” and it is the right combination of these that makes a successful project. The study also suggest that:

“A crowd-sourcing project should therefore have the capacity to allow large numbers of people to be involved, even if only a very small number of contributors end up being actively engaged (which is often the case). Indeed, most of the humanities crowd-sourcing projects represented at the May meeting reported that a very small number of contributors generally do a very large percentage of the work. The point is that the body of contributors is self-organising and self- selecting, and there is not be a central(ised) recruitment process.”

The British Library acknowledges the substantial work of “expert” users in their crowd sourced mapping project Georeferencer http://www.bl.uk/maps/index.html where participants connect points on maps scanned from the British Library’s archive to accurate points on current maps, enabling their map collections to be “searchable and viewable using popular online geotechnologies”.

Google’s History Pin http://www.historypin.com/ which now has a mobile app, enables sharing of personal histories attached to locations, or to edit/‘refine’ other people’s uploads. Also working with organisations such as national archives.

Crowdsourcing – and showing local relevant information: Mapping independent record stores in response to threatened closure of HMV Jan2013 https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=213005303957418577651.0004d3510885d6d65ac0f&msa=0&ll=53.19287,-1.043701&spn=4.061551,9.876709

———–

http://crowdcrafting.org/about – PyBossa – free, open-source crowd-sourcing and micro-tasking platform that makes it easy for people to participate: “Instead of using Google Spread-sheets, tweets with designated hashtags can be imported directly into PyBossa where digital volunteers can tag and geo-locate said tweets as needed. As soon as they are processed, these tweets can be pushed to a live map or database right away for further analysis.”

(via http://irevolution.net/2013/01/20/digital-humanitarian-micro-tasking/)

———–

http://www.ushahidi.com –  a non-profit tech company that specializes in developing free and open source software for information collectionvisualization and interactive mapping

———–

Crowdsourced project using GIS – Mapping independent record stores in response to threatened closure of HMV Jan2013

—————-

television archive in the Netherlands – has projects where people can contribute, adding sound files to maps etc

—————–

Crowdsourcing:

Quote from Jackie Calderwood paper that points out why cinemapping wants to allow users to add their own content

“Location based services, may span the urban and rural with guided tours or similar. Yet they commonly deliver information as non-negotiable ‘play on enter’ content3 which, it could be argued, dominates the visual experience, and dictates the individual’s journey of exploration.

Philosopher Bernard Stiegler, writing on the constraints of mass media for our society in the technological age, stresses the vitality of seeing technology, ‘technics’, as part of humanity – our progression of evolving tools – not as separate from us, and therefore any forward movement of society needs to embrace such tools.

Foresight consultant Andrea Saveri, urges that ‘communities that thrive in the future will be the ones who can create new patterns of learning, relationship, and value creation’. 

—————–
Paper on Layering Community Media in Place, Clodagh Miskelly & Constance Fleuriot 2006

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s