What is the Research Project?

Hermeneutic Phenomenology – interpretive textual meaning. Heidegger and Gadamers championed this research approach. Also Ricoeur. The meaning of Being, the Self and Self-Identity. An interesting point – attempting to watch a video remix without any prior knowledge or preconditions may be folly as to fully appreciate the ingenuity in the work requires a knowledge, awareness of the viewer having experienced or observed the source material in order to ‘get’ the meaning. This also implies that remixes potentially have a relatively short shelf-life, especially if they reference current affairs. On the other hand, it is easy to find out enough information or find the source material online and watch it in order to full appreciate the remix, if necessary.
What am I trying to find out? Why is it worth knowing? How will I go about doing this? What has been done so far? What will be achieved by Easter / Summer? Short background – setting the scene. A new generation of media activists are using political remix video to get their messages out to new audiences and ultimately act as a catalyst for social change. Tackling many of the big social issues of the day, including human rights violations, political and commercial corruption, social injustice, unethical and irresponsible behavior and business practices by corporations, attacks on freedom of expression and erosion of personal privacy, to name but a few. I am trying to fully understand the media content which may be categorized as Political Remix Video or Critical Remix Video and how it affects its viewers, the motivations behind its production and how acceptable the practice of making this work, the subject matter of which may often be considered unethical or immoral by certain interest groups, how acceptable it is in our societies. The implications of PRV on the original source material used in the remix and the companies or individuals who originated it and the differences of interpretation between Western and Eastern cultures – can a PRV still ‘work’ or have worth even if the viewer has never seen the source material before? Or is the meaning entirely lost in such cases? The conflict this causes in relation to the Phenomenological Reduction technique, where a work is meant to be observed without prior knowledge or context. These questions are worth answering because they will contribute to the discourse on media activism and its effects in a useful and productive way, allowing us to better understand how the construction of a piece of propaganda affects how the audience feels when they observe it. Collect work. Analyse it. Show to audiences. Analyse audience.

Research Question

What is my research about? I am questioning the prevalent ethical assumptions about appropriation in digital media. What assumptions? Should we start with the laws and work backwards? For example, copyright law is based on a set of ethical assumptions that have developed over time. Do I really think that one research project can change copyright law? Obviously not. What I’m trying to do is show that there is a clear disparity between the prevalent attitudes towards appropriation and actual practice. I aim to try to measure opinions of key stakeholders in the debate. To what extent should cultural works be available for others to use as building blocks in the creation of new works? Not withstanding the Intellectual Property laws, which are effectively ignored in most cases, what are people producing in this space and how does it impact on the source material? Who are the artists, how much have they produced? I want to map the remix landscape in as much detail as possible to paint a picture of what is happening and how things are evolving. Who has the power in this situation? The power is shifting. Media corporations had cultural works under lock and key for most of the 20th century and had complete, almost unquestionable control over who got to see, watch, read, listen to what, when and in what manner. Digitisation has opened the floodgates, making all media accessible to anyone anytime and in whatever manner or by whatever means an individual may choose to consume it. Take a Hollywood movie – previously you would purchase a cinema ticket and see the film in a cinema theatre, wait 6 months to a year and rent it on video or DVD or wait another year to 18 months and watch it on TV. Now you can still do all of these things, but also you can get it on your computer on or before its release date, download it and watch it on any digital device – iPod, iPhone, iPad, media player or you can stream it through a website, e.g. YouTube or any of the multitude of video streaming sites. Equally as importantly, anyone with the file, a computer and internet connection can upload the movie and make it available to everyone from yet another source. This is effectively uncontrollable without infringing on the basic human rights to privacy and freedom of expression. Which do we value more – the aforementioned fundamental rights or the protection of corporate profits? Is it an either / or scenario?