An attempt at distilling the core of my research enquiry as a value proposition or elevator pitch style summary. If someone asks ‘what is your PhD about’? How do I answer? I’m researching the implications of ‘remixing’ copyrighted audio visual material to produce political statements. What am I trying to find out? To what extent may producing political remixes be considered ethical behavior? The act of producing political remix work, a more recent form of ‘Tactical Media’ – where is the line? In Western Culture – in Eastern Culture? What is acceptable in the USA and Europe may not be acceptable in China or the Middle East. What is the Spectrum? Totally unacceptable behavior on one side, completely acceptable behavior on the other. Balance in the middle. This deals with censorship – who are we talking about? Who decides? There is no classification system for online videos. A cartoon of Mohammed is considered offensive enough to warrant the execution of the cartoonist.
Political remix may be considered in similar terms. If someone creates a remix highlighting the behavior of a multinational corporation, the subject of the piece will not be happy about it. The copyright holders of the material used may not be happy with the image they are being associated with and loyal consumers of the company’s products and services may not be happy with how they are being portrayed. The intended message of each specific remix must also be considered – the remixer is taking an ethical stance, saying it is unethical or even wrong that such and such a person did or continues to do such and such a thing, yet how does the remixer end up on the moral high ground? What qualifies the artist to pass judgment on the multinational corporation, the US army, Muslims or anyone else for that matter? What is the threshold for unacceptable behavior? Should there be such a threshold? How can ‘acceptable behaviour’ be enforced? How is any individual or group better placed than any other to make claims about what anyone should or should not be allowed to do or say? Is it a case of majority rules? Or do some people now better than others? Should a small elite be allowed to make decisions for what they think is best for the unwashed masses? Is Political Remix an effective tool in effecting change?