Young &amp; Creative

Alejandra  Ravettino Destefanis

The 21st century saw the rise of digital media technologies which have influenced nearly every aspect of our lives. Digital media is part of the everyday life of many children and young people, as they use digital technologies to communicate, consume, learn, interact, and to create. This book, Young and Creative – Digital Technologies empowering Children in Everyday Life, aims to identify a variety of examples where children and youths have been active and creative by using their own initiative, and by being driven by intrinsic motivation, personal interests, and peer relations. How to theorise, display, and initiate creativity is also included in the book.

The Creative YouTubers YOUNG & CREATIVE Somewhere around 300-400 hours of video is uploaded every minute on the immensely popular platform of YouTube. In this section, authors present examples of videoblogging, otherwise known as vlogging, a common feature among viewers. Some vloggers have become world famous through their presence on the screen, some of them are still mostly known among their friends and family. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life Ilana Eleá & Lothar Mikos (eds.) The International Clearinghouse on Children, Youth and Media, at A UNESCO INItIAtIvE 1997 Nordicom University of Gothenburg Box 713 In 1997, the Nordic Information Centre for Media and SE 405 30 GÖTEBORG, Sweden Communication Research (Nordicom), University of Gothenburg, Web site: Sweden, began establishment of the International Clearinghouse www.nordicom.gu.se/clearinghouse on Children, Youth and Media. The overall point of departure for Director: Ingela Wadbring the Clearinghouse’s efforts with respect to children, youth and information co-orDinator: media is the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Catharina Bucht The aim of the Clearinghouse is to increase awareness and Tel: +46 31 786 49 53 knowledge about children, youth and media, thereby providing Fax: +46 31 786 46 55 catharina.bucht@nordicom.gu.se a basis for relevant policy-making, contributing to a constructive public debate, and enhancing children’s and young people’s media literacy and media competence. Moreover, it is hoped that the The Clearinghouse Clearinghouse’s work will stimulate further research on children, is loCaTed aT nordiCom youth and media. Nordicom is an organ of The International Clearinghouse on Children, andisMedia Somewhere around 300-400 hours ofYouth video uploadedco-operation between the Nordic informs various groups of users – researchers, policy-makers, every minute on the immensely popular platform of You-countries – Denmark, Finland, Iceland, media professionals, voluntary organisations, teachers, students Norway and Sweden. The overriding goal In individuals this section, authors present examples of video-and purpose is to make the media and and Tube. interested – about The Creative YouTubers communication efforts undertaken in the blogging, otherwise known as vlogging, a common featureNordic countries known, both throughout • research on children, young people and media, with among viewers. Some vloggers have become world famousand far beyond our part of the world. special attention to media violence, Nordicom uses a variety of chan-nels through their presence on the screen, some of them are still– newsletters, journals, books, databases – to reach researchers, students, decisionknown amongregarding their friends family. •mostly research and practices mediaand education and makers, media practitioners, journalists, children’s/young people’s participation in the media, and teachers and interested members of the general public. Nordicom works to establish and • measures, activities and research concerning children’s and young people’s media environment. strengthen links between the Nordic research community and colleagues in all parts of the world, both by means of unilateral lows and by linking individ- Fundamental to the work of the Clearinghouse is the creation of a global network. The Clearinghouse publishes a yearbook and reports. Several bibliographies and a worldwide register of organisations concerned with children and media have been compiled. This and other information is available on the Clearinghouse’s web site: ual researchers, research groups and www.nordicom.gu.se/clearinghouse Council of Ministers. institutions. Nordicom also documents media trends in the Nordic countries. The joint Nordic information addresses users in Europe and further aield. The production of comparative media statistics forms the core of this service. Nordicom is funded by the Nordic YOUNG & CREATIVE YOUNG & CREATIVE Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) © Editorial matters and selections, the editors; articles, individual contributors; Nordicom 2017. ISBN 978-91-87957-85-7 (print) ISBN 978-91-87957-86-4 (pdf) he publication is also available as open access at www.nordicom.gu.se Published by: he International Clearinghouse on Children, Youth and Media Nordicom University of Gothenburg Box 713 SE 405 30 GÖTEBORG Sweden Images reprinted with permission from copyrightholder Cover photo: Johan Strindberg / Bildhuset / TT Cover by: Per Nilsson Printed by: Ale Tryckteam AB, Bohus, Sweden, 2017 25 CONTENT Preface 7 Introduction Young and Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life 9 ON CREATIVITY 1 The Rhetorics of Creativity Shakuntala Banaji 17 2 Creativity on YouTube. Considering New Media and the Impulses of the Learner Danah Henriksen, Megan Hoelting 31 3 The Class: Living and Learning in the Digital Age: Interview with Sonia Livingstone 43 THE CREATIVE YOUTUBERS 4 How YouTube Developed into a Successful Platform for User-Generated Content Margaret Holland 53 5 Top Girls on YouTube. Identity, Participation, and Consumption Lidia Marôpo, Inês Vitorino Sampaio, Nut Pereira de Miranda 65 6 The YouTube Channel RAK TV. A Narrative Interview with Rachel Cócaro, 14 Years Old Paulo Guimarães, Maria Inês de C. Delorme 77 EXPRESSIONS OF CREATIVITY AMONG CHILDREN AND YOUTH 7 “Exclusively for Keitai”. Literary Creativity of Japanese Media Youths Kyounghwa Yonnie Kim 8 A Shared Literary Experience. Youth Reading, Creativity and Virtual Performances Alejandra Ravettino Destefanis 91 103 9 Internet Mukbang (Foodcasting) in South Korea Seok-Kyeong Hong, Sojeong Park 111 10 “Transmedia Storytelling as a Narrative Expansion”: Interview with Carlos Scolari 125 11 Conversations on Creativity and Communication Carmilla Floyd 131 COLLECTING AND SHARING CREATIVITY 12 “My Portfolio Helps My Making”. Motivations and Mechanisms for Documenting Creative Projects Anna Keune, Naomi Thompson, Kylie Peppler, Stephanie Chang 145 13 Pockets of Freedom, but Mostly Constraints. Emerging trends in children’s DIY media platforms Deborah A. Fields, Sara M. Grimes 159 14 Peer Teaching and Learning. A Case of Two Five-year-olds as Minecrat Creators Sara Sintonen, Maj-Britt Kentz, Lasse Lipponen 173 15 “Children Love to be Hilariously Silly and Dead-Serious Alike”: Interview with Margret Albers 185 TRAINING TEACHERS TO SPARK YOUNG PEOPLE’S CREATIVITY 16 AMORES. Discovering a Love for Literature through Digital Collaboration and Creativity Geof Walton, Mark Childs, Janet Hetherington, Gordana Jugo 193 17 Bringing Maker Literacies to Early Childhood Education Jill Scott, Karen Wohlwend 209 18 Meeting Change with Creativity: Interview with Kirsten Drotner 221 Preface oday´s digital technology provides opportunities to create and reach out to a wide range of users. Diferent platforms, in particular online platforms, has enabled anyone with access to the tools not only to be a consumer of media content, but also a producer. his opportunity is something many young people have grasped in order to express themselves and to share their own creativity. All books published by the International Clearinghouse on Children, Youth and Media aim to shed light on diferent themes concerning children, youth and media, hopefully raising knowledge and awareness on current aspects of young people’s media use and consumption and hopefully serve as inspiration to further research and exploration. he point of departure for the Clearinghouse’s eforts is the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, among other stating the child’s right to freedom of expression. hus, a publication on creativity with digital media where this freedom can be exercised is well within the aim of the Clearinghouse. And considering the vast popularity among young people to watch, share and ind inspiration in peer produced content we found it highly relevant to address this theme. We are deeply grateful to the editors of this book, Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos, who have managed to gather a diversity of examples from scholars and practitioners in how young people’s creativity can be expressed in diferent ways and in diferent parts of the world. T Göteborg, December 2017 Catharina Bucht Information co-ordinator Ingela Wadbring Director, Nordicom 7 Introduction Young and Creative Creativity in Everyday Practices he 21st century saw the rise of digital media technologies which have inluenced nearly every aspect of our lives. Digital media is part of the everyday life of many children and young people, as they use digital technologies to communicate, consume, learn, interact, and to create. his book, Young and Creative – Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life, aims to identify a variety of examples where children and youths have been active and creative by using their own initiative, and by being driven by intrinsic motivation, personal interests, and peer relations. How to theorise, display, and initiate creativity is also included in the book. We want to examine the opportunities of digital technologies for the creative processes of children and young people. Access to digital technology and its growing convergence (Jenkins, 2006a; Jenkins et al., 2009) has allowed young people to experience active roles as cultural producers. Participation becomes a keyword when “consumers take media into their own hands” (Jenkins, 2006b:132). Since in participation culture people are seen both as consumers and producers, Young and Creative presents cases of children and young people being actively involved when creating, sharing, and responding to media. But what are they doing when they engage with media as DIY (Do-It-Yourself) creators and producers? A diversity of content-creating platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, DeviantArt, Faniction. net, Tumblr, Figment, Wordpress, and Scratch can be seen as “ainity spaces” (Lammers, Curwood & Magniico, 2012), which are digital and informal spheres where there is a passion for creating and sharing. T 9 Eleá, Ilana and Mikos, Lothar (2017) Introduction – Young and Creative. Creativity in Everyday Practices in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Introduction – Young and Creative In order to explore young people’s ainity spaces and new literacies or transmedia literacies and creativity, (see the interview with Carlos Scolari in this book), Young and Creative primarily, but not exclusively, focuses on what children and young people are doing in out-of-school or out-of-institutional spaces, showing how they are engaging in participatory and collaborative social contexts. he reader will also ind examples of creative experiences in the classroom, from daycare to elementary school and international projects and festivals. The tone and sections of the book he 18 articles in Young and Creative are divided into ive sections. he irst section, On creativity, opens with an article written by Shakuntala Banaji and ofers a conceptualisation of creativity. Her rhetorical approach navigates questions such as “does creativity reside in everyday aspects of human life or is it something special?”, inviting the reader to analyse youth practices with digital media through historical and theoretical lenses. Danah Henriksen and Megan Hoelting´s article focuses on the creative aspects of YouTube and the impulses of the learner that YouTube as a channel allows. he interview with Sonia Livingstone touches upon issues that are important to relect on: YouTube’s popularity does not imply homogeneity in meaning or use. In her research project ‘he Class’ carried out with Julian Seton-Green, they observed that among 28 teens in a class in the UK, 28 diferent patterns of use were found, and only six were used to upload contents. However, YouTube is the favourite online destination for many children around the world. he second section of Young and Creative is titled he Creative YouTubers and Margaret Holland´s article further investigates common factors shared by YouTube celebrities, describing the behind the scenes of the phenomenon of user-generated content. Two other texts consider Brazilian children as actors. Lidia Marôpo, Inês Vitorino Sampaio, and Nut Pereira de Miranda focus on colours to analyse the success of young female YouTubers in the country. Paulo Guimarães and Maria Inês de C. Delorme further contribute by shedding light on the details of Rachel, a 14 year old YouTuber, who talks about her practices, fears, and dreams. In the section Expressions of creativity among children and youth, we present Kyounghwa Yonnie Kim’s research on the possibility of writing 10 Introduction – Young and Creative novels on mobile phones. he genre of keitai novels is also presented in this book. Literature also appears in another title of Young and Creative where Alejandra Ravettino Destefani´s article informs us that young people are using the YouTube platform to create videos, and share their passion about ictional books, incentivising new readers to get involved with stories. We believe that it is fundamental to be curious and aware of the stories that children and young people are sharing on social media. Seok-Kyeong Hong and Sojeong Park’s article on the mukbang phenomenon, in South Korea, can serve perhaps as an unusual example. The interview with Carlos Scolari centres around the concepts of transmedia storytelling and its place within informal learnings spaces such as YouTube, social media and blogs, which bring forwards what he calls a narrative expansion. Carmilla Floyd, a journalist with experience in interviewing children around the globe, was challenged to have an open online dialogue with young Instagram users from Sweden, China, South Africa, USA, and Vietnam. he photos that these young people took and shared while reading their motivations and aspirations are published here. Collecting and sharing creativity is a section that focuses on different platforms facilitating creative communication, the sharing of knowledge and giving opportunity to exercise freedom of expression. It includes peer-teaching and learning among two ive-year olds. In order to shed light on new possibilities for teaching and learning, local examples using e-portfolios (see Anna Keune, Naomi hompson, Kylie Peppler & Stephanie Chang’s article); DIY media platforms (Deborah A. Fields & Sara M. Grimes’ article); and Minecrat (Sara Sintonen, Maj-Britt Kentz & Lasse Liponen’s article), give us some innovative ideas. he interview with Margret Albers highlights the main scenes from a German Children’s Media Festival, where children have been producing ilms (and more recently television programmes) for competition since 1996. Children and young people are immersed in digital spaces, experiencing their creativity online, feeling driven to learn and share more of their ideas, but what can schools learn from their stories, YouTube videos, and e-artefacts? In the inal section, Training teachers to spark young people’s creativity, readers can ind information about how the 11 Introduction – Young and Creative European project AMORES (Geof Walton, Mark Childs, Janet Hetherington & Gordana Jugo’s article) suggests ways to ill in the gaps between children’s media use and school. It is an international aim invested in teacher training and joint initiatives to increase involvement with reading literacies. Play, toy hacking, and ilmmaking in early literacy is explored in Jill Scott and Karen Wohlwend’s article, where stages of character development, storyboarding and ilming, video editing and sharing, are included in a ive-year study on literacy play. An interview with Kirsten Drotner closes the book with a strong appeal: how may we guide children’s freedom to express themselves online? “We need to turn the tables”, she says. Some final words he articles and examples in this book indicate an interesting fact: even though digital technologies have a global appeal, the creative activities of children and young people are deeply rooted in their social and cultural environment and show cultural specialties. Young and Creative is a mix of research articles, interviews, and case studies with contributions from Asia, Europe, North America, and South America. he target audience of this book is students, professionals, and researchers working in the ield of education, communication, children and youth studies, new literacy studies and media and information literacy. We would like to thank Ingela Wadbring and Catharina Bucht for the fruitful ideas and Per Nilsson for the creative book cover and graphic art. Stockholm and Potsdam Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos References Jenkins, H, (2006a). Fans, bloggers, and gamers: Exploring participatory culture. New York: New York University Press. Jenkins, H. (2006b). Convergence culture: When old and new media collide. New York: NYU Press. 12 Introduction – Young and Creative Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Weigel, M., Clinton, K., & Robison, A. J. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Cambridge: MIT Press. Lammers, J. C., Curwood, J. S., & Magniico, A. M. (2012). Toward an ainity space methodology: Considerations for literacy research. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 11 (2), 44–58. Ilana Eleá, PhD in Education by PUC-Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, is former scientific coordinator at The International Clearinghouse on Children, Youth and Media, Nordicom, Sweden. Lothar Mikos, Professor of Television Studies, Department of Media Studies, Filmuniversität Babelsberg KONRAD WOLF, Potsdam, Germany, and Honorary Professsor at University of International Business and Economy, Beijing, China, l.mikos@ filmuniversitaet.de 13 On Creativity he irst section of this anthology revolves around discussions on what creativity is. he reader will meet diferent rhetorics of creativity, what is written and said about it, and how new media technology can meet the impulses of learning and thus enable youth (and others) in creative expressions. 1 The Rhetorics of Creativity Shakuntala Banaji his article introduces understandings of creativity in relation to social relations, play and pedagogy in policy and practice: where these understandings come from in terms of their theoretical heritage, what functions they serve, how they are used, and in whose interest. he focus is on discourses about creativity circulating in the public domain. he aim here is not to investigate creativity itself, but rather what is written and said about it. Creativity is thus presented as something constructed through discourse and how we might choose to locate ourselves in relation to claims being made about it. In the critical review of literature from which this article originates (Banaji & Burn, 2006), the rhetorics of creativity are given names which broadly correspond to the main theoretical underpinnings or the ideological beliefs of those who deploy them. hus, the rhetorics referred to in this article are as follows: T • Creative Genius • Democratic Creativity and Cultural Re/Production • Ubiquitous Creativity • Creativity for Social Good • Creativity as Economic Imperative • Play and Creativity • Creativity and Cognition • he Creative Afordances of Technology • he Creative Classroom and Creative Arts and Political Challenge 17 Banaji, Shakuntala (2017). The Rhetorics of Creativity in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Shakuntala Banaji he rhetorics have complex histories; in the following sections, brief indications of these histories are sketched. Following these historical descriptions, the rhetorics are traced through in academic and policy discourses. he discussion of individual rhetorics raises a series of questions that cut across and connect several rhetorics to each other. For instance, two questions running through the rhetorics of Genius, Democratic and Ubiquitous creativity are: Does creativity reside in everyday aspects of human life or is it something special? And what are the diferences between ‘cultural learning’ and ‘creative learning’? Similarly, the issue of whether there is, in fact, any diference between ‘good’ and ‘creative’ pedagogy is the focus of attention in a number of the rhetorics. Writing on creativity in education distinguishes between creative teaching and creative learning, but oten fails to establish precisely how such processes and the practices they entail difer from ‘good’ or ‘efective’ teaching and ‘engaged’ or ‘enthusiastic’ learning. So, is there good teaching that is not creative? Meanwhile, the questions of how signiicant play and individual socialization are remain central to several rhetorics. Creativity: Unique or democratic? he rhetoric which could be said to have the oldest provenance and to have remained resilient, albeit in more subtle guises, within educational pedagogies in the 20th and 21st centuries is that of Creative Genius. his romantic and post-romantic rhetoric (Simonton, 1999; Scruton 2000) dismisses modernity and popular culture as vulgar, and argues for creativity as a special quality of a few highly educated and disciplined individuals (who possess genius) and of a few cultural products. In this rhetoric, culture is deined by a particular discourse about aesthetic judgment and value, manners, civilization and the attempt to establish literary, artistic and musical canons. It can be traced back through certain phases of the Romantic period to aspects of European Enlightenment thought. Perhaps the most inluential Enlightenment deinition of genius is in Kant’s Critique of Judgment, which presents it as the ‘mental aptitude’ necessary for the production of ine art, a capacity characterized by originality, and opposed to imitation. Frequently, for its proponents, ‘novelty’ is viewed as a negative – almost dangerous – attribute when proposed by those who do not possess the 18 The Rhetorics of Creativity requisite skill and inspiration to maintain a link with what is regarded as the best in the past. Signiicantly for the rhetorics Play and Creativity and he Creative Classroom, some commentators write as if there are two diferent ‘categories’ of creativity, which have been dubbed, variously, ‘high’ and ‘common’ (Cropley, 2001), or ‘historical’ and ‘psychological’ (Boden, 1990) (or ‘special’ and ‘everyday’). he former comprises the work and powers of those who are considered ‘geniuses’, and is pursued via studies of the work and lives of ‘great’ creative individuals (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997) and regarded as ‘absolute’, while the latter is far less well deined but clearly relative and can be fostered, increased and measured. he latter can also, broadly, be split into two traditions: one grounded in culture or subculture and the other based on notions of ‘possibility thinking’ and dubbed ‘little-c’ creativity (Crat, 1999) in ordinary situations. he rhetoric of Democratic Creativity and Cultural Re/Production provides an explicitly anti-elitist conceptualization of creativity. Most familiar in the academic discipline of Cultural Studies, it sees everyday cultural practices in relation to the cultural politics of identity construction, focusing particularly on the meanings made from and with popular cultural products. his rhetoric provides a theory derived from the Gramscian perspective on youth subcultures developed by the Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies. It constitutes practices of cultural consumption (especially of ilms, magazines, fashion and popular music) as forms of production through activities such as music sampling, subcultural clothing and fan activity (Cunningham, 1998), and thus belongs to an inluential strand of cultural studies which attributes considerable creative agency to those social groups traditionally perceived as audiences and consumers or even as excluded from creative work by virtue of their social status (Willis, 1990). Similarly egalitarian, but without the basis in cultural politics, is the rhetoric of Ubiquitous Creativity. Here, creativity does not only entail the consumption and production of artistic products, whether popular or elite, but involves a skill in terms of responding to the demands of everyday life. In this discourse, being more creative involves having the flexibility to respond to problems and changes in the modern world and in one’s personal life (Crat 1999, 2003). While much of the writing in this rhetoric is targeted at early years’ education with 19 Shakuntala Banaji the aim of giving young children the ability to deal relexively and ethically with problems encountered during learning and family life, examples used to illustrate ‘everyday creativity’ include attempts by working-class individuals or immigrants to ind jobs against the odds without becoming discouraged. his too is a highly resilient strand in commentaries on this subject and has a strong appeal for educators (Jefrey 2005; Cohen 2000). Clearly for those even nominally in favour of retaining a particular link between creativity and the arts and culture (Negus & Pickering, 2004), who see creativity as something ‘special’ (or indeed who see it as being about challenge and social critique rather than conformity to rules), this approach raises the question: Is this view of creativity as an ability to be lexible in meeting the demands of life incompatible with the notion of creativity as something that adds a special quality to life? It seems that there remain tensions between activities, ideas and creations that are dubbed ‘creative’ in particular social contexts or historical moments and those that are rejected for fear of their playful, disruptive or anarchic potential. Creative socialization and ‘successful’ societies? he rhetoric of Creativity for Social Good is characterized by its emphasis on the importance for educational policy of the arts as tools for personal empowerment and ultimately for social regeneration (Robinson et al. 1999). It stresses the integration of communities and individuals who have become ‘socially excluded’ (for example by virtue of race, location or poverty) and generally invokes educational and, tangentially, economic concerns as the basis for generating policy interest in creativity. his rhetoric emerges largely from contemporary social democratic discourses of inclusion and multiculturalism. In this view, a further rationale for encouraging creativity in education focuses on the social and personal development of young people in communities and other social settings. In this view, ‘creative and cultural programmes’ are seen to be twofold mechanisms of social cohesion, ‘powerful ways of revitalising the sense of community in a school and engaging the whole school with the wider community’ (Ibid, 26). Although Robinson’s NACCCE1 committee team accept that exceptionally gited creative individuals do exist, their report favours a ‘democratic’ deinition of creativity over an 20 The Rhetorics of Creativity ‘elite’ one: ‘Imaginative activity fashioned so as to produce outcomes that are both original and of value’ (1999: 29). Here, culture and other cultures are things to be ‘dealt with’ and ‘understood’. While this somewhat reductive view has been criticised (Marshall, 2001; Buckingham & Jones, 2001), it has a broad appeal amongst those who see creativity as a tool in the project of engineering a strong national society. In an allied rhetoric much in evidence since dot.coms came on the scene and in an era of lexible digital labour, Creativity as Economic Imperative, the future of a competitive national economy is seen to depend on the knowledge, lexibility, personal responsibility and problem-solving skills of workers and their managers (Scholtz & Livingstone, 2005). hese are, apparently, fostered and encouraged by creative methods in business, education and industry (Seltzer & Bentley, 1999). here is a particular focus here on the contribution of the ‘creative industries’, although the argument is oten applied to the commercial world. Again, this rhetoric annexes the concept of creativity in the service of a neoliberal economic programme and discourse (Landry, 2000). Instead of being about imagination or the motivation to learn and create, the imperative here is the requirement to assist the modern national capitalist economy in its quest for global expansion. But, realistically, we must ask questions about the variety of arenas and domains in which those who buy into this ‘new’ vision of creativity would be allowed to function. Would time for the playful testing of ideas be built into the working days of ‘knowledge workers’? Or perhaps they would have to accommodate such necessary but peripheral business in their own personal time by giving up leisure. In what way might diferent skills lead to creative production? It seems unlikely that the mere acquisition of skills would be suicient as a contribution to a greater collective or corporate endeavour. Clearly, while the newly lexible workforce – or student body – might be encouraged to manage themselves and their departments or sections, their control over the overall structures and practices of their organizations might remain as limited as ever (Pope, 2005). A inal problem that arises with the use of the term creativity in this context is a deinitional one. As with the generalized application of creativity to all teaching and learning in all subjects, the danger is that it simply becomes a more glamorous and appealing synonym for ‘efectiveness’, thereby losing its distinctive sense. 21 Shakuntala Banaji Serious or playful stuf? he rhetoric of Creativity and Cognition can be seen as incorporating two quite diferent traditions. One includes theories of multiple intelligences (Gardner, 1993) and the development of models to document and increase people’s problem-solving capacity (for instance, Osborn-Parnes 1941 CPS model) as well as explorations of the potential of artiicial intelligence (Boden, 1990). his latter work attempts to demonstrate the links made during, and the conditions for, creative thought and production. he emphasis of all strands in this tradition is on the internal production of creativity by the mind, rather than on external contexts and cultures. he other tradition consists of more intra-cognitive and culturally situated notions of creative learning expounded by Vygotsky (1994), who asserts that ‘If a person “cannot do something that is not directly motivated by an actual situation” then they are neither free nor using imagination or creativity’ (1994: 267). he importance attributed to ‘freedom’ of thought and action and to non-goal-orientated playful activity in Vygotsky’s writing about adolescent learning remains controversial in educational or work environments, where the ability to plan a project and execute it, solve a problem, or pass a test are markers of efectiveness. More lexible indicators of creativity, such as the various ‘intelligences’ described by Gardner, have been used on occasion in a positive manner to soten the harshness of traditional literacy and numeracy-based academic assessment. Sadly, however, Vygotsky’s far more critical and unusual theorizing has been largely ignored. A persistent strand in writing about creativity, the rhetoric of Play and Creativity turns on the notion that childhood play models, and perhaps scafolds, adult problem-solving and creative thought. It explores the functions of play in relation to both creative production and cultural consumption. Some cognitivist approaches to play do share the emphasis of the ‘Creative Classroom’ rhetoric on the importance of divergent thinking. Sandra Russ (2003), for instance, argues that the ways in which children use language, toys, roleplay and objects to represent diferent things in play are habitual ways of practising divergent thinking skills. But not all those who champion play do so in ways that are conducive to the freedom of thought, creative action, or divergent and critical 22 The Rhetorics of Creativity thinking. Dixon and Webber (2007) point to links between adults’ nostalgia for a remembered context of play in their own childhoods and emerging, ingrained and oten naturalized social rhetorics about play in modern children’s lives. Taking to task those who mourn the ‘death’ of an era when play was outdoors, safe, free and unmediated, they note that ‘[i]n response to both panic and nostalgia, adults are increasingly organizing and regulating their children’s play’ (2007: 25). his discussion can be seen to mirror discourses that have emerged with regard to creativity, technology and (new) media. Cordes and Miller, for instance, assert that ‘a heavy diet of ready-made computer images and programmed toys appear to stunt imaginative thinking’ (2000: 4). But the fact that certain commentators, possibly with nostalgic memories of socially privileged childhoods and an exaggerated paranoia about ‘modern’ media, might overstate the case against digital playtime does not mean that all technology-based play and learning are either harmful or necessarily beneicial to children’s creativity. A digital ‘creativity pill’ or a damaging potion? If creativity is not inherent in human mental powers and is, in fact, social and situational, then technological developments may well be linked to advances in the creativity of individual users. he rhetoric constructed around he Creative Afordances of Technology covers a range of positions, from those who applaud all technology as inherently creative to those who welcome it cautiously and see creativity as residing in an as yet under-theorized relationship between users and applications. But it is worth asking how democratic notions of creativity are linked to technological change in this rhetoric. Is the use of technology itself inherently creative? And how do concerns raised by opponents of new technology afect arguments about creative production? For Avril Loveless (2002), thanks to a complex set of features of ICT (provisionality, interactivity, capacity, range, speed and automatic functions), digital technologies open up new and authentic ways of being creative ‘in ways which have not been as accessible or immediate without new technologies’ (2002: 2). Loveless (1999) argues that technology, which is being used in schools in varieties of ways, can enhance creative learning, but only if children’s expectations and teachers’ anxieties are handled sensitively. Challenging those who champion digital technol23 Shakuntala Banaji ogies as inherently creative, Scanlon et al. (2005) and Seiter (2005) also note that many computer programmes designed to increase children’s knowledge and skills are not in the least bit creative, relying on rote learning, repetition and drill exercises. hus, they argue that digital technology can – but does not necessarily – support the expression and development of creativity. In a society where technology is not equally available to all, children may well be enthusiastic and conident users of digital technologies when ofered the opportunities for playful production, but they are still divided by inequalities of access outside school and across the school system. Ultimately, the social contexts of the use of digital technology may help or hinder its creative potential. Evaluation, learning and pedagogy Pertinently for those interested in creativity and communication, placing itself squarely at the heart of educational practice, he Creative Classroom rhetoric investigates questions about the connections between knowledge, skills, literacy, teaching and learning, and the place creativity occupies in an increasingly regulated and monitored curriculum (cf. Beetlestone 1998; Starko 2005; Jefrey 2005). his rhetoric locates itself in pragmatic accounts of ‘the crat of the classroom’, rather than in academic theories of mind or culture. Creative learning is interactive, incorporating discussion, social context, sensitivity to others, the acquisition and improvement of literacy skills; it is contextual, and has a sense of purpose and thus cannot be based around small units of testable knowledge; however, it can also be thematic and highly speciic, as it oten arises out of stories or close observation, which engage the imagination and the emotions as well as learners’ curiosity about concepts and situations. he Creative Classroom rhetoric is consistent in identifying holistic teaching and learning – which link playful processes to diferent types and domains of knowledge and methods of communication – as more compatible with and conducive to creative thought and production than the increasingly splintered, decontextualized, top-down and monitored content and skills which are favoured as being academically ‘efective’. here is, however, a tension in this work between what could be broadly deined as a rather romantic wish to view creativity as something that enhances the human soul and helps young people blossom, 24 The Rhetorics of Creativity and the need to give practical advice to trainee teachers, thus itting them for the fairly chaotic but restricted milieu they will soon enter. At points this tension is productive, or at the very least practical, in the sense that it prevents the educational perspective on creativity from sidestepping issues, such as assessment and time management, that are of very real signiicance for practitioners in both formal educational and more unorthodox settings. Many educators have to walk a tightrope between institutional constraints and the fragility of their constructed ‘creative’ environment. However, at times the tension also appears to lead to contradiction or even paradox: risk-taking is to be encouraged, but it is also to be kept within easily controllable bounds; time is required for playful engagement with ideas and materials, but this time has stringent external parameters in terms of the school day. Work by Banaji, Cranmer & Perotta (2013) provides evidence that interventions by governments in education have created a culture of vocationalization, standardization and competition which is a barrier to creative pedagogy, playful exploration and creative work in the classroom. While it is clear that a number of students continue to work in imaginative and divergent ways, and that some teachers still encourage them to do so by valuing playful or subversive discussion and creative production with new or traditional technologies, the literature on creativity in contemporary classroom settings suggest that this is despite, rather than because of, most current education policies. Although not considered in detail here, in response to such institutional realities, and setting a challenge to aspects of foregoing rhetorics, Creative Arts and Political Challenge sees art and participation in creative education as necessarily politically challenging, and potentially transformative of the consciousness of those who engage in it. It describes the processes of institutional pressure that militate against positive and challenging experiences of creativity by young people, regardless of the eforts of teachers and practitioners (homson, Hall & Russell, 2006). In previous work on this topic (Banaji & Burn, 2006; Banaji & Burn, 2007) this rhetoric is pursued further, with an emphasis on the questions it raises about creative partnerships, social contexts and political or philosophical presuppositions. If one wishes to retain the idea of cultural creativity as having an oppositional rather than a merely socializing force, it is important not to lose sight of the 25 Shakuntala Banaji ways in which broader inlections of discourses of creativity relate to the micro-politics of particular social settings. he very luidity and confusion in talk about creativity in the classroom can mean that the term is used as window dressing to appease educators who are interested in child-centred learning, without actually being incorporated into the substantive work of the classroom. Conclusion In discussions of creativity, it is crucial that we understand and respond to the relationship between the cultural politics of talk about creativity or play and a wider politics. While there is evidence from numerous studies (Balshaw, 2004; Starko, 2005) that creative ways of teaching and learning, and creative projects in the arts, humanities and the sciences, ofer a wider range of learners a more enjoyable, lexible and independent experience of education than some traditional methods, there is no evidence that simply giving young people or workers brief opportunities for creative play or work substantially alters social inequalities, exclusions and injustices. Creativity is not a substitute for social justice. here is a complex, and not always clearly identiiable, cultural politics behind many rhetorics of creativity, as there is behind educational rhetorics and the rhetorics of play. his is the case not only within discourses which explicitly address questions about power, and about whose culture is seen as legitimate and whose is not; it is also the case in discourses where constructions of power remain implicit, such as those which celebrate ‘high art’ as ‘civilizing’ and child art as being about an ‘expression of the soul’, or which see the development of workers’ creativity as being ‘for the good of the national economy’ and the constant testing and attribution of levels of ability to children as a way of raising ‘standards’. Some discourses explicitly legitimize certain forms of cultural expression and certain goals, and implicitly delegitimize others. Increasingly, such discourses aid gatekeepers within educational institutions by stigmatizing particular pedagogies and parenting choices. Talk about creativity is, then, always political, even when it appears not to be. Shakuntala Banaji, Dr, Media and Communications, London School of Economics and Political Science, United Kingdom, s.banaji@lse.ac.uk 26 The Rhetorics of Creativity Note 1. National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education, UK. References Banaji, Shakuntala; Burn, Andrew & Buckingham, David (2006). he Rhetorics of Creativity: A Review of the Literature, London: Arts Council of England. Banaji, Shakuntala & Burn, Andrew (2007). Creativity through rhetorical lens: implications for schooling, literacy and media education, (pp.62-70) in Cremin, Teresa; Comber, Barbara & Wolf, Shelby (eds.) Literacy, vol.41 (2). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Banaji, Shakuntala; Cranmer, Sue & Perrotta, Carlo (2013). What’s stopping us? Barriers to creativity and innovation in schooling across Europe, (pp.450-463), in homas, Kerry & Chan, Janet (eds.) Handbook of Research on Creativity. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Balshaw, Maria. (2004). Risking creativity: building the creative context. Support for Learning, 19(2): 71-76. Beetlestone, Florence (1998). Creative Children, Imaginative Teaching. Buckingham: Open University Press. Boden, Margaret (1990). he Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Buckingham, David & Jones, Ken (2001). New Labour’s cultural turn: some tensions in contemporary educational and cultural policy. Journal of Educational Policy 16(1): 1-14. Cohen, Gene (2000). he Creative Age: awakening human potential in the second half of life. New York: HarperCollins. Colleen, Cordes & Miller, Edward (2000).Fool’s gold: A critical look at computers in childhood, Alliance for Childhood. Available at <http://www.allianceforchildhood. net/projects/computers/computers_reports_fools_gold_download.htm> [Accessed 7th July, 2007]. Crat, Anna (1999).Teaching Creativity: Philosophy and Practice. London and New York: Routledge. Crat, Anna (2003). Creative hinking in the Early Years of Education. Early Years, 23(2): 147-158. Cropley, Arthur J. (2001). Creativity in Education and Learning: a guide for teachers and educators. London, Kogan Page. Csikszentmihalyi, Mihály (1997). Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention: New York: Harper Perennial. Acknowledgements In formulating the rhetorics that appear here and in tracing their lineage, I am grateful for the substantial contributions and critiques of Andrew Burn and David Buckingham. I also thank Creative Partnerships for the opportunity to research and write the literature review from which this article arises, and the Arts Council for the permission to reproduce sections of that literature review. 27 Shakuntala Banaji Cunningham, H. (1998) Digital Culture – the View from the Dance Floor, (pp.128-148) in Seton-Green, Julian (ed.), Digital Diversions: Youth Culture in the Age of Multimedia. London and New York: Routledge. Dixon, Shanly & Webber, Sandra (2007). Play Spaces, Childhood and Video games, (pp.17-36) in Webber, Sandra & Dixon, Shanly (eds.) Growing Up Online: Young People’s Everyday Use of Digital Technologies. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. Gardner, Howard (1993). Frames of Mind: he heory of Multiple Intelligences. London, Fontana Press Jefery, Graham (ed.) (2005). he Creative College: building a successful learning culture in the arts. Stoke on Trent UK and Sterling, USA: Trentham books. Kant, Immanuel (1790 [2000]). he Critique of Judgement. New York: Prometheus Books. Landry, Charles (2000) .he Creative City: A Toolkit for Urban Innovators. London, UK and Sterling, USA, Commedia: Earthscan Publications. Loveless, Avril (1999). A digital big breakfast: the Glebe School Project, (pp.32-41) in Seton-Green, Julian (ed.) Young People, Creativity and New Technologies: the Challenge of Digital Arts. London and New York: Routledge. Loveless, Avril (2002). Literature Review in Creativity, New Technologies and Learning. NESTA Futurelab. Marshall, Bethan (2001). Creating Danger: he Place of the Arts in Education Policy, (pp.116-125) in Crat, Anna; Jefrey, Bob & Leibling, Mark (eds.) Creativity in Education. London: Continuum. Negus, Keith & Pickering, Michael (2004). Creativity, Communication and Cultural Value. London, housand Oaks, New Delhi: SAGE. Pope, Rob (2005). Creativity: heory, History, Practice. London and New York, Routledge: QCA. Robinson, Ken et al. National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education (1999). All Our Futures: Creativity, Culture and Education. Sudbury, Sufolk, DfEE publications: NACCCE. Russ, Sandra (2003). Play and Creativity: developmental issues. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 47(3): 291-303. Scanlon, Margaret; Buckingham, David & Burn, Andrew (2005). Motivating Maths: Digital Games and Mathematical Learning. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 14(1): 127-139. Scholtz, Antonie & Livingstone, D. W. (2005). Knowledge workers’ and the ‘new economy’, in Canada: 1983-2004.’ Paper presented at 3rd annual Work and Life Long Learning (WALL) conference. Scruton, Roger (2000). Ater Modernism. City Journal 10(2). Electronic resource, NP. Seiter, Ellen (2005). The Internet Playground: Children’s Access, Entertainment and Mis-Education. New York: Peter Lang. Seltzer, Kimberly & Bentley, Tom (1999). he Creative Age: Knowledge and Skills for the New Economy. London: Demos. Simonton, Dean (1999). Genius, Creativity, and Leadership: Historiometric Inquiries. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. Starko, Alane (2005). Creativity in the Classroom: Schools of Curious Delight. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. homson, Pat, Hall, Christine & Russell, Lisa (2006). An arts project failed, censored or...? A critical incident approach to artist-school partnerships. Changing English: Studies in Culture and Education. Vol 13 (1): 29-44. 28 The Rhetorics of Creativity Vygotsky, Lev [1994(1931)]. Imagination and Creativity in the Adolescent (pp.266-288) in Van Der Veer, Rene & Valsiner, Jaan (eds.). he Vygotsky Reader. Oxford UK and Cambridge USA: Blackwell. Willis, Paul (1990). Common Culture. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. 29 2 Creativity on YouTube Considering New Media and the Impulses of the Learner Danah Henriksen & Megan Hoelting n today’s globalized media, a new type of individual has emerged as a celebrity. Such individuals work creatively with a range of media, oten converging on one particular platform: YouTube. One of the oldest examples of this type of celebrity is Smosh1, a duo, Anthony Padilla and Ian Hecox, who established their comedic channel in 2005, which went on to generate a number of spin-ofs. he two young millionaires represent a wave of creative artists who are lexible and aware of the creative power of this medium. Smosh began in 2005; today, there are more examples of YouTube stars and popular channels than most traditional media can keep up with. For example, Joey Gracefa2 is just such an adaptable YouTube star. His early creative work on his YouTube channel garnered him a large multimedia contract and a place in the arena of popular culture. Spawned by his success in YouTube media, he has found opportunities to collaborate with other artists, write for a web series, and bring his ideas into multiple arenas. Most recently, Gracefa made headlines with his memoir, In Real Life: My Journey to a Pixelated World, in which he came out as homosexual. This announcement is revolutionary compared to coming-out announcements from more traditional stars, such as Ellen DeGeneres, Lance Bass, Clay Aiken, and Adam Lambert – who all provided exclusive interviews in traditional media. hough this new medium, I 31 Henriksen, Danah & Hoelting, Megan (2017). Creativity on YouTube. Considering New Media and the Impulses of the Learner in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Danah Henriksen & Megan Hoelting Image 1. The Smosh duo Image 2. Joey Gracefa on his book cover Gracefa had the creative power to use YouTube to decide how he wanted to communicate and share with others. his is just one example of a phenomenon in which youths are gaining creative power in new media, to exercise their voices, create and share content, and participate in creative communities globally. New technologies have opened up such possibilities for young creative artists, like Gracefa, to showcase their talents and ideas online. YouTube has been the prime example and source of the global phenomenon of video creation and sharing. Accelerating technological growth has caused our society to reconsider how we work, think, and act (Mishra, Koehler, & Henriksen, 2011; Mokyr, Vickers, & Ziebarth, 2015), and we ind ourselves in a world where knowledge, entertainment, and content can be created, communicated, and obtained more quickly and easily than ever (Zhao, 2012). New digital tools, from smartphones to free online image, audio, or video editors (such as the YouTube Video Editor, WeVideo, Audacity, or Pixlr), have put new media technology for content creation and sharing in the hands of more 32 Creativity on YouTube people than ever – particularly young people. With the power of these tools, society has seen a rise in what has been termed “content creation.” his means that anyone, with the right tools, has the ability to create video or audio content and share it via avenues like YouTube (Burgess & Green, 2013). he growth and magnitude of the medium, across a range of video content, topics, and genres, is rooted in what new media allow people to do – create, communicate, collaborate and share – in powerful and global ways (Lange, 2007; Haridakis & Hanson, 2009). In this article, we suggest that the afordances of YouTube have put signiicant creativity in the hands of more youths than ever. his has revolutionized how systems of creativity operate, and has allowed for the phenomenon of YouTube stars. Avenues like YouTube allow people to sidestep traditional gatekeepers within a ield, to become successful content creators, sharing their work directly with an audience. his has implications for society, culture, and education in the opportunities it ofers to create and share. We suggest that this connects with Dewey’s (1943) and Bruce & Levin’s (1997) framework for viewing media and technology as a way to address “the four impulses” of the learner. As described by Dewey, these impulses are: to inquire, to communicate, to construct, and to express (Dewey, 1943; Bruce & Levin, 1997). New media ofer afordances for creating and sharing, which opens up possibilities to explore all these learning impulses. he culturally pervasive popularity of YouTube and other new media may lie in the way they address these needs and impulses. As educational contexts seek to meet the creative needs of youth, we suggest revisiting the educational foundations of Dewey – in speaking to these four impulses as a framework for educational technology. But irst, we consider how new media like YouTube reveal a change in systems of creativity, with greater participation by students and youth. The changing landscape of content creators YouTube has remodeled how culture, art, and knowledge emerge in the online medium (Snickars & Vonderau, 2009). It is one of the more impactful global phenomena that media and culture have experienced. YouTube statistics note that the platform has over a billion users – about a third of all people on the Internet. Daily, hundreds of millions 33 Danah Henriksen & Megan Hoelting of hours of YouTube videos are watched, generating billions of views. Beyond this, YouTube has local versions in over 88 countries, with more than 76 diferent navigational languages (covering 95% of the Internet population) (YouTube Press Statistics, n.d.). Across the medium there are examples of people enjoying tremendous success and popularity (i.e. “YouTube stars”) in genres ranging across comedy, music, the arts, science, fashion, makeup and beauty, general interest, and countless specialized topics (Henriksen, Hoelting, & the Deep-Play Research Group, 2016). he majority of major YouTube artists predominantly describe themselves as “content creators.” his term deines these artists not simply as entertainers or informers, but rather as creators of ideas, of actions, of content (Susarla, Oh & Tan, 2012). We propose that the artists who ind great success on YouTube are becoming a new form of expert. hese experts are content creators who can now bypass the standard gatekeepers of genres before distributing their work. Bereiter & Scardamalia’s (1993) deinition of expertise notes that it is not only determined by knowledge or tenure in an area, but by how the knowledge is adapted to unique contexts and new challenges. here are still experts in traditional domains that may pose valid questions about these new creative displays, and communities of practice still have gatekeepers to success. However, emerging and popular artists on YouTube are reframing their domain and its context of how creative systems operate and the communities that participate in them. In a recent study (conducted in 2014 and replicated in 2015), researchers asked youths aged 13–18 to compare the inluence and popularity of YouTube stars to that of mainstream traditional stars (Dredge, 2016). hey found that YouTube stars such as Smosh, the Fine Bros, KSI and Ryan Higa were considered more inluential than mainstream celebrities like Paul Walker, Jennifer Lawrence, Katy Perry and Bruno Mars. his represents a transformation in youth culture, whereby more young people have the tools and access to produce content, and even more youths globally can ind, connect, and communicate about it. In the past, the tools and platforms for such creation and connection did not exist in ways that would allow such youth participation, but their recent advent is generating a shit in creative systems. 34 Creativity on YouTube New media redefines systems of creativity Csikszentmihalyi (1997) discusses how in traditional systems, creativity emerges from a dynamic interaction between the individual, the domain, and the ield. In this, individuals (or groups/teams) make creative works, ideas, art, or discoveries. Creativity is also impacted at the level of the domain, or an area of speciic knowledge (e.g. mathematics, biology, physics, art, law, and more), where people use domain ideas, information, tools and symbols to create new works. hen, through the ield, creative works may be shared with an audience or disseminated. he ield involves people who act as gatekeepers to decide what is important and what will be distributed into broader culture or disciplines. he ield has typically relected the communal organization of “experts,” in communities of practice – people with the knowledge and clout to decide what would be shared to inluence the domain, socially and culturally (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997). Who the gatekeepers are depends on context. It might entail a Nobel Prize committee, journal editors or reviewers, music or movie industry executives, Olympic judges, and so on (Henriksen Hoelting, & the Deep-Play Research Group, 2016). In the past, the ield was the only entity that determined which creative works would be shared for social and cultural impact (Sawyer, 2006). his model is visualized in the image shown below. Figure 1. Csikszentmihalyi’s model of traditional creativity systems 35 Danah Henriksen & Megan Hoelting Examples like Smosh and Joey Gracefa are not anomalies in new media (Berg, 2015). They represent a fast growing phenomenon, in which individuals can use new media to sidestep the traditional gatekeepers of creativity (the ield), and propel themselves to creative success. In altering this gatekeeping aspect of creative systems, new media allow for creation and sharing in powerful ways, and youths have been among the irst to recognize and harness these capabilities (Harlan, Bruce, & Lupton, 2012). Video, audio, and other creative media tools have afordances that allow a young audience to explore, create, and share. We suggest that these impulses for exploration, creation and sharing are human and innate. hey have always been present, but now there are avenues to pursue them and participate through media as a means of creativity. Understanding new media through a Deweyan lens Foundational ideas described by Dewey (1943) may inform what motivates young people to learn with media. hese foundations are visible in the social phenomenon of YouTube as a means of creating and sharing work. he future of education may be well served to consider this framework as a lens for creative teaching and learning with media. Dewey (1943) identiied a natural basis for learning as the greatest educational resource or psychological reserve that society might tap into. his includes what he described as the four natural impulses of the child. hese innate, or natural, interests revolve around following the impulses of learners: 1) to inquire (to ask and explore questions, or to ind things out); 2) to communicate (to connect and share ideas with others, to communicate and enter into the social world); 3) to construct (to build or make things); and 4) to express (to engage in personal expression of one’s self, feelings, and ideas). Dewey asserted that education should build curricula around these instinctive impulses rather than separating learning into the traditional disciplines. From a Deweyan perspective, the greatest imperative for education is to nurture these impulses, building a trajectory for lifelong learning. hese four impulses may clue us in to motivations underlying the phenomenon of how YouTube and new media are shaping our world. Consider what new creative media allow youths to do, as they engage with video, images, sound, text, and more, through technologies that 36 Creativity on YouTube indulge these four impulses. he afordances ofered by the YouTube platform, and other media for creation and sharing, suggest that new technologies may be motivational and exciting based on how they allow people to inquire, communicate, construct, and express. Twenty years ago, as digital technologies were on the cusp of becoming more widespread in society and schools, Bruce & Levin (1997) proposed using Dewey’s framework of the four impulses to view media for learning. hey argued that most approaches to educational technology, like schooling, were organized around traditional perspectives. Instead of a technology-tool-centered focus, they suggested that education consider the kinds of motivations, interests, and inspirations that media could allow people to engage with. hey noted that classifying educational technologies by how they allow for Dewey’s (1943) natural learning impulses may be a productive and exciting approach to learning. When Bruce & Levin (1997) proposed this idea 20 years ago, the available technologies were more limited in power, capabilities, and afordances than today. Yet the core constructs of Dewey’s foundations contained strength and value for thinking about media. Despite these strengths, however, many schools in many contexts (both then and now) operate with a more tool-centered focus rather than building learning around media as a venue for inquiry, communication, construction, and expression. We suggest that 21st-century education might consider how the YouTube phenomenon has swept up the interests of youth, as both producers and consumers of content. his may ofer a model of thinking about how classrooms could focus less on the rigid boundaries of traditional curricula and subjects, and instead work with media to stimulate and develop inquiry, communication, construction, and expression. In this, students and teachers can view themselves as creative individuals and creators of content. Exploiting the potential for creative education he popularity of YouTube may lie in what it allows people to do, in the power to create and also connect to the larger world. YouTube ofers ways to inquire (to ask questions and create or ind videos that explore ideas in the world around us); to communicate (to hear and share ideas from others, through the viewing and sharing of content); to construct 37 Danah Henriksen & Megan Hoelting (to build or make content, in ways that let people participate, rather than accepting prepackaged content); and to express (to share our own views, feelings, or identity). We do not suggest that everything on YouTube is important or useful content, as this is clearly not the case. But it is important to consider how it allows for a new creative reality among young people. It is a motivational approach to media that inspires youths to join and explore, create, and share – via the prospect of engaging their natural impulses to inquire, communicate, construct, and express. his takeaway is a powerful one for education, in terms of classroom content and new media for creativity. Since its inception, YouTube has been a site for artists to upload their original or remixed works. he balance between consumers and producers initially leaned heavily toward consumers (YouTube Press Statistics, n.d.); however, while the site still has more consumers than producers, the ratio is becoming increasingly more balanced. his has two possible interpretations: more creators are discovering the site; or consumers are realizing their creative potential and adding their own content to the site. In either (or both) cases, it signiies a shit in how people are interacting with media. We are entering the age of the creative consumer, one who is hungry for new media but also capable of creating their own when they ind the status quo lacking. his has repercussions for the potential of youths to participate in creative communities, and for diverse voices that have been lost in the past. Noticing gaps in representation can become a catalyst for creation (Kaitlyn Alexander interview, Piccoli, 2015), and an opportunity to connect youths to the wider world and a greater diversity of voice. Furthermore, content creators are not conined to one form of media; they feel comfortable enough in their expertise to make creative attempts with other modalities or a range of topics and subjects. he “content” these creators distribute is not limited by mode or discipline. For example, some of the most popular content creators (Grace Helbig, Mamrie Hart, Tyler Oakley, etc.) have expanded their artistry to other platforms, which oten necessitates a new mode of communication. In a classroom, such a perspective would alter the rigid structure of course content. To encourage students to become boundary-crossing content creators, we might readjust our worldview to one that “demands new pedagogical structures that respect nonconformity and the urge to 38 Creativity on YouTube explore for the sake of exploration, to value risk-taking and learning from failure and error” (de Oliveira et al., 2015, p. 20). Image 3. The elements of content creation What might learning in schools look like if education ofered more constructivist opportunities, through new media, for students to try their hand at being “content creators” of their own learning? Many are already engaging in this informally, outside the school context; so, we ask, how might education consider the “content creator” model for learning in schools? here are also implications involved in asking what it might mean for teachers to view themselves as content creators, given the autonomy and lexibility to creatively design opportunities and environments for their students. What if we organized teaching and learning not around the typical structures of schooling, but rather in opportunities to use media for inquiry, communication, construction, and expression? We do not ofer immediate answers to such questions, but as digital technologies and 21st-century learning move forward, it may be time for education to seriously consider them. We have noted that creative systems are evolving, based on YouTube and other new media, to allow for greater creative participation in certain contexts and genres. People oten operate online as either consumers or producers of content, and there are now more producers than in the past – certainly among youth. It is also interesting to note that more educational channels are arriving on the scene, such as Minute Physics and ASAP Science (Welbourne & Grant, 2015). his suggests 39 Danah Henriksen & Megan Hoelting that content creation can intersect with big ideas and school content, in ways that can be compelling for teaching and learning. We have proposed ideas and questions for consideration, suggesting that the YouTube model of a content creator might be valuable for teaching and learning in the classroom. We have noted that Dewey (1943) and Bruce & Levin (1997) established ideas about media as a way to connect with the four impulses of the learner, which seems prevalent for the world we live in and for education broadly. Currently, these are still ideas and questions; but in noting them, we point to their potential for youth creativity in school settings. As most of the questions in this new arena may not be fully known or articulated yet, we propose that the ield consider these emergent issues and bring them into the broader discourse. All of this points to the overarching issue of how the power of new media for creation can be harnessed to promote a creative and expansive mindset in students. Perhaps appropriately for the shiting terrain of new media, we conclude with more questions than answers – ofering these as emergent and vital possibilities and considerations for creativity and education. Notes 1. 2. https://www.youtube.com/smosh https://www.youtube.com/JoeyGracefa References Berg, Madeline (2015). he World’s Top-earning YouTube Stars 2015. Forbes, 18 November 2015 [online]. Available at http://www3.forbes.com/business/the-worlds-topearning-youtube-stars-2015/. [Accessed 19 November 2015]. Bereiter, Carl & Scardamalia, Marlene (1993). Surpassing Ourselves: An Inquiry into the Nature and Implications of Expertise. Chicago, IL: Open Court. Bruce, Chip Bertram, & Levin, James (1997). Educational technology: Media for inquiry, communication, construction, and expression. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(1): 79-102. Burgess, Jean & Green, Joshua (2013). YouTube: Online Video and Participatory Culture. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Danah Henriksen, Assistant Professor, Division of Educational Leadership and Innovation, Arizona State University, United States, danah.henriksen@asu.edu Megan C. Hoelting, Doctoral Student, Learning, Literacies, and Technologies, Arizona State University, United States of America, megan.hoelting@asu.edu 40 Creativity on YouTube Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly (1988). he Flow Experience and its Signiicance for Human Psychology. New York, NY: Harper and Row. Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly (1997). Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. New York, NY: HarperPerennial. de Oliveira, Janaina Minelli; Henriksen, Danah; Castañeda, Linda; Marimon, Marta; Barberà, Elena; Monereo, Carles; Coll, Cesar; Mahiri, Jabari, & Mishra, Punya (2015). he educational landscape of the digital age: Communication practices pushing (us) forward. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal, 12(2): 14-29. Dewey, John (1943). he child and the curriculum and the school and society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Dredge, Stuart (2016, February, 3). Why are YouTube Starts So Popular? he Guardian. Available at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/03/why-youtube-stars-popular-zoella. [Accessed 24 September 2016] Gracefa, Joey (2015). In Real Life: My Journey to a Pixelated World. New York: Simon & Schuster. Haridakis, Paul, & Hanson, Gary (2009). Social Interaction and Co-viewing with YouTube: Blending Mass Communication Reception and Social Connection. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53(2): 317-335. Harlan, Mary Ann; Bruce, Christine, & Lupton, Mandy (2012). Teen Content Creators: Experiences of Using Information to Learn. Library Trends, 60(3): 569-587. Henriksen, Danah; Hoelting, Megan, & the Deep-Play Research Group (2016). A Systems View of Creativity in a YouTube World. Tech Trends, 60(2): 102-106. Lange, Patricia. (2007). Publicly Private and Privately Public: Social Networking on YouTube. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 13(1): 361-380. Mokyr, Joel; Vickers, Chris, & Ziebarth, Nicholas (2015). he history of technological anxiety and the future of economic growth: Is this time diferent? he Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(3): 31-50. Mishra, Punya, Koehler, Matthew, & Henriksen, Danah (2011). he 7 Transdisciplinary Habits of Mind: Extending the TPACK Framework towards 21st century Learning. Educational Technology, 51(2): 22-28. Sawyer, R. Keith (2006). Educating for innovation. hinking Skills and Creativity, 1(1): 41-48. Susarla, Anjana; Oh, Jeong-Ha, & Tan, Yong (2012). Social Networks and the Difusion of User-Generated Content: Evidence from YouTube. Information Systems Research, 23(1): 23-41. Snickars, Pelle & Vonderau, Patrick (Eds.) (2009). he YouTube Reader. Stockholm: National Library of Sweden. Welbourne, Dustin & Grant, Will (2015). Science Communication on YouTube: Factors that Afect Channel and Video Popularity. Public Understanding of Science, (6): 706-18. YouTube Press Statistics (n.d.). In YouTube.[online]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube. com/yt/press/statistics.html. [Accessed 24 September, 2016]. Zhao, Yong (2012). World Class Learners: Educating Creative and Entrepreneurial Students. Corwin Press. 41 3 The Class: Living and Learning in the Digital Age Interview with Sonia Livingstone S onia Livingstone is Professor of Social Psychology in the Department of Media and Communications at London School of Economics. Taking a comparative, critical and contextualised approach, Sonia’s research asks why and how the changing conditions of mediation are reshaping everyday practices and possibilities for action, identity and communication rights. Her empirical work examines the opportunities and risks aforded by digital and online technologies, including for children and young people at home and school, for developments in media and digital literacies, and for audiences, publics and the public sphere more generally, with a recent focus on children’s rights in the digital age. She leads the project, Preparing for a Digital Future, which follows the recently-completed project, The Class, both part of the MacArthur Foundation-funded Connected Learning Research Network. She directed the 33-country network, EU Kids Online, funded by the EC’s Better Internet for Kids programme, with impacts in the UK and Europe.1 You and Julian Seton-Green recently launched the book The Class: Living and Learning in the Digital Age. Could you tell us about the project? Our book is about a class of 13- to 14-year-olds at an ordinary urban secondary school in London. his is a famously tricky age for parents and teachers, and for young people themselves. We were curious about what young people want, how they see the world, and how they ind a path through the opportunities and constraints they face. Our 43 The Class: Living and Learning in the Digital Age. Interview with Sonia Livingstone in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Interview with Sonia Livingstone media [are becoming] more digital, convergent, commercialised and intensely networked, but is it useful to take a step further and describe our lives as ‘digital lives’ – as in the now-commonplace terms ‘digital parenting’…‘digital natives’…‘digital learning’ or ‘digital creativity’? We did not expect simple answers, but rather we hoped to provoke a contemplation of the uncertainties and ambiguities associated with the evolving interrelations between technological and social change. And while we certainly did not assume that teenagers’ lives today bear no relation to those of previous generations, we did want to explore the ways they think about and try to manage socio-technical change, including how they cope with the personal risks associated with changes oten beyond their control. When researching The Class, you said the most important thing was to focus on ordinary rather than exceptional uses of media among 13-year-olds. Did you find that they do explore creativity through learning, creating and sharing, and can you give some examples? Our work is part of the MacArthur Foundation-funded Connected Learning Research Network, where we were inspired by the possibility that ‘connected learning taps the opportunities provided by digital media to more easily link home, school, community and peer contexts of learning; support peer and intergenerational connections based on shared interests; and create more connections with nondominant youth, drawing from capacities of diverse communities’ (Ito et al., 2013). But, having heard from our colleagues about the adventurous achievements of pioneering young people forging exceptional pathways to creativity, we decided instead to inquire into the experiences of an ordinary class of children from a fairly typical London suburb. Could we identify what makes some stand out while others do not? Could we, even, pinpoint some advice for parents, teachers and policy makers to support more young people in harnessing digital media for creative and civic purposes? I’ll answer your question by focusing on how the class used YouTube, now the most popular app among UK teenagers. Its popularity doesn’t imply homogeneity in meaning or use, however, for the 28 teens in the class revealed 28 diferent patterns of use. But only six of them had ever uploaded anything, raising important questions about how young people’s digital interests can be supported and sustained. 44 The Class: Living and Learning in the Digital Age Could you give us some examples? Abby and Salma, for instance, had spent a happy day setting up a YouTube channel and posting 8-10 episodes of ‘he Abby and Salma Show’ before retreating in mortiication when their history teacher got wind of their eforts and showed everyone. Megan had a period of making videos and uploading them to YouTube too, describing herself as ‘obsessed’ with searching YouTube, going to meet-ups and so forth. But for her, too, this had become embarrassing, and she turned her attention to a private exploration of identity in Tumblr. Nick was more persistent, having paired up with a friend with editing skills to make videos of his Xbox game play and upload them as tutorials for others. Giselle, perhaps the most creative girl in the class, had created her own YouTube channel for stop-frame animation – like the others, she collaborated with a friend in this creative practice, gaining several hundred views before she, too, gave it up. What is the price for young learners if schools do not incorporate youth self-expression and creativity in their curriculum spaces and practices? As these examples show, youthful creativity in the class beneited little from the input of teachers or, indeed, parents. Both tend to dismiss these creative activities as kids wasting their time watching silly videos about people falling of walls or cute kittens. his is partly because even the most attentive parents spend relatively little time with their children online, instead watching at a distance with half an eye on the time, worrying about homework or exercise, or judging the quality of the results rather than asking if their child is progressing in a creative or critical direction. As you can see, I see huge missed opportunities here. Parents have invested considerable sums in equipping their home with digital technology but they invest rather less time in sharing the experience with their child so as to scafold their learning in productive directions. Meanwhile, teachers are pressured to deliver the curriculum within the walls of the school but are oten sceptical about children’s chances of interest-driven, self-managed learning at home. As I said, 28 children make for 28 stories, so our conclusions must be nuanced. Joel was something of a sad case. In an unusually forthcoming 45 Interview with Sonia Livingstone Image 1. Parents have equipped their home with digital technology interview for this shy and seemingly unhappy boy on the edge of the social scene, he talked with enthusiasm about using YouTube tutorials combined with music-making sotware and mixing decks to record his own music on the computer. And yet the interview unravelled when I pushed a little further – for it turned out that such activities were not practically possible at home (or indeed in the rather standardised music technology lessons I witnessed at school). Rather, his account was aspirational; these are things he has heard about and hopes to follow up in the future. While Joel seems to be missing out on opportunities he would relish, Alice represents a contrary case. She didn’t really bother with YouTube much – but it would be wrong to characterise her as apathetic or uncreative. For Alice turned out to be incredibly active in her local community – with babysitting, Girl Guides, community events – and she also did singing, trampolining, netball and ice-skating out of school, and arts and crats, DIY and photography at home. Is it really necessary, one wonders, for a 13-year-old girl to also get creative in uploading stuf to YouTube for society to celebrate her achievements? Meanwhile, Gideon was something of a paradox. At school, and online, he stood right at the centre of the social network – the boy who cracked jokes, played football and computer games with the boys, had twice as many friends on Facebook as anyone else. Yet at home, when we got to know him better, he was quieter, revealing some past diiculties requiring ‘anger management’ classes and, now, a quiet reliance on the succour of his immediate family. Interestingly, his use of YouTube was fairly edgy – ‘America’s hardest prisons’, ‘Angry Scottish guy kicks 46 The Class: Living and Learning in the Digital Age and snatches’, ‘Jamaican gangs.’ Perhaps he was working through some residual anger? Or perhaps he was gathering the material to impress his classmates the next day to maintain his edgy reputation? Even when they are creative online, it’s hard to be sure if this brings long-term beneits. In an interview with Giselle a few years later, I discovered that she is, indeed, pursuing an artistic career. Was the early experimentation with YouTube a valuable stepping stone? Perhaps, though this was surely outweighed by the signiicant help she received throughout her childhood from her professionally artistic parents. his diversity depends on home resources – inancial, parental, cultural – and on each young person’s particular bent and interests. On the one hand, several of these stories invite the question: with more support, could the kids have taken their creative irst steps much further, gaining vital skills for the digital age? On the other hand, their stories invite the observation that, given everything else that’s going on in their lives, engaging with YouTube may not be their top priority. If you could send a message to parents and teachers about children’s and youth’s media creative production based in a ‘bedroom culture’ what would you say? What do they need to be aware of and/or inspired by? he Class shows that, while parents and teachers oten have young people’s best interests at heart, they do not always agree on what these best interests are, leaving young people let down by the broken pathways ofered to them yet not sustained across home and school. Meanwhile, young people are trying to ind their own way, not necessarily seeing eye to eye with their parents or teachers and even avoiding beneicial opportunities so as to maintain ‘positive disconnections’ — oline and online spaces to pursue their own meanings and experiences away from the gaze of parents and teachers. Given the inevitable tensions between children and adults about the values and practices, oten based on the fact that children and young people focus on the here-and-now while parents and teachers tend to interpret everything through the lens of ‘the future’ – and a highly competitive future at that (future ‘success’, ‘keeping up’, ‘getting ahead’) – what message would I ofer? 47 Interview with Sonia Livingstone A year with 28 young people was, irst and foremost, heartening as an experience of youthful optimism, enthusiasm and, for the most part, resilience. But the same year with their parents was more chequered – sometimes airming but oten anxious, with anxieties centring disproportionately on digital media rather than the many other things parents have to worry about (quality of relationships, inancial security, health, community tensions, their children’s growing independence, etc.). Of course, in reality, parents worried about all these things, but the very fact that these endemic concerns are, somehow, crystallised by the digital, with the digital acting as a lightning rod for so many parental uncertainties means that, ironically, parents ind it diicult to support the potential beneits of digital media. For teachers, under ever greater pressure in our competitive and standardised school systems, it is the promise of digital media for alternative, non-standardised activities, and for collaborative rather than individually-assessed outcomes, blurring the boundary between home and school, that appears so challenging. As a result, they too struggle to support children’s creative digital activities. My message should, by now, be obvious. Attribute problems where they rightfully occur and don’t target the media as an easy object of blame. Ask children what they enjoy about digital media and ind ways to help them deepen and develop their skills. Judge their activities by the child’s level of enthusiasm and sense of progressing rather than with an adult or competitive eye to the outcomes. And, last, recognise that digital media represent an opportunity for many children to explore private emotions and interests in a world that is increasingly surveilled and constrained by anxious adults. So maybe just leave them be. Note 1. http://www.lse.ac.uk/media%40lse/WhosWho/AcademicStaf/SoniaLivingstone. aspx References Ito, Mizuko, Gutiérrez, Kris, Livingstone, Sonia, Penuel, Bill, Rhodes, Jean, Salen, Katie, Schor, Juliet, Seton-Green, Julian, & Watkins, Craig. (2013). Connected Learning: An agenda for research and design. Irvine, CA: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub. Available at dmlhub.net/wp-content/uploads/iles/Connected_Learning_report.pdf 48 The Class: Living and Learning in the Digital Age Livingstone, Sonia & Seton-Green, Julian (2016) he Class: Living and Learning in the Digital Age. New York: New York University Press. Available at nyupress. org/books/9781479824243/; read for free online at connectedyouth.nyupress. org/book/9781479824243/; watch the launch event at www.lse.ac.uk/media@lse/ events/CYDF-Book.aspx For more about Sonia, see www.sonialivingstone.net, follow her on Twitter @Livingstone_S and read her blog posts at blogs.lse.ac.uk/ parenting4digitalfuture 49 The Creative YouTubers Somewhere around 300-400 hours of video is uploaded every minute on the immensely popular platform of YouTube. In this section, authors present examples of videoblogging, otherwise known as vlogging, a common feature among viewers. Some vloggers have become world famous through their presence on the screen, some of them are still mostly known among their friends and family. 4 How YouTube Developed into a Successful Platform for User-Generated Content Margaret Holland n October 2, 2010, Felix Kjellberg uploaded a 2-minute YouTube video of himself speaking on camera while playing a video game. Today, Kjellberg, better known by his YouTube alias, “PewDiePie,”1 uploads to an online audience of over 40 million subscribers. At just 24, Kjellberg has developed his online persona into a brand name that pulls in an estimated $4 million in ad sales a year (Kain, 2014). Kjellberg is not alone. An astonishing number of individuals have made YouTube their career. With consistent viewing from cable’s most sought-ater age demographic, ages 18 to 49, YouTubers like Kjellberg have formed a virtual yet powerful relationship with their viewers (Luscombe, 2015). User participation helps in creating the stability of loyal audiences. he wide variety of content makes YouTube a place where just about anyone can ind a video that interests them, whether they are looking for Kjellberg’s gaming commentary or a makeup routine. Of the 3.2 billion people who have Internet access, more than one billion are accessing YouTube videos (Luscombe, 2015). Founded in 2005 as a platform where amateur users could upload their videos online, YouTube has established itself as a part of the entertainment industry. Since its development, YouTube has transformed from a video-sharing site into a career opportunity for content creators. In this article O 53 Margaret Holland (2017) How YouTube Developed into a Successful Platform for User-Generated Content in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Margaret Holland three inluential YouTubers’ channels – Felix Kjellberg (PewDiePie) from Sweden, Zoe Sugg (Zoella)2 from England, and Grace Helbig (itsgrace)3 from America –were studied. he author tried to identify what makes a YouTube channel successful through examining the qualities of three YouTubers who represent one of the site’s most popular content categories. Literature review YouTube started as a site to distribute user-generated content and later has developed into a platform where an individual can turn their personal brand into a career. Before analysing the rise and success of Felix Kjellberg, Zoe Sugg, and Grace Helbig, it is important to understand how YouTube has grown as a content-sharing platform. Founded by Chad Hurley, Steven Chen, and Jawed Karim, YouTube launched with little fanfare in June 2005. As Burgess and Green (2009:I) explain: YouTube was one of a number of competing services aiming to remove the technical barriers to the widespread sharing of video online. he website provided a very simple, integrated interface within which users could upload, publish, and view streaming videos without high levels of technical knowledge. YouTube was comparable to other video start-ups at the time until Google acquired the site for $1.65 billion in October 2006 (Burgess & Green, 2009:I). he site has steadily gained popularity, and since 2008 it has consistently been in the top ten most visited sites globally (Morreale, 2014). Almost a decade later it is the world’s third most popular online destination with availability in 61 languages and a million advertisers (Luscombe, 2015). Since being purchased by Google, YouTube has evolved from a site where amateur and ad-free videos were posted to an online destination consumed by commercialised videos. But there is another side according to Morreale (2014:114), “Its tagline ‘Broadcast Yourself ’ invites ordinary users to take an active part in creating the material they consume. At the same time, less obvious is that YouTube is a business whose purpose is to generate proit”. About this institutionalisation of YouTube, Kim (2012:56) wrote: 54 How YouTube Developed into a Successful Platform for User-Generated Content If the pre-Google era of YouTube is characterized by amateur-produced videos in an ad-free environment, the post-Google purchase stage is characterized by professionally generated videos in an ad-friendly environment. Because of YouTube’s popularity, industries have shown a deep interest in monetizing it. his interest in monetising content has allowed channels that started as a hobby to develop into a source of income for content creators. Lavaveshkul (2012:378) describes this development from hobby to job: , “heir beginnings were simple and they produced their videos from beginning to end: they wrote the script (if there was one), acted, did the camera work (otentimes using an inexpensive camera on a tripod), and did the post production”. To a viewer, the lack of a script or set made the experience of watching a YouTube video more relatable. Kjellberg further elaborated on this experience in an interview when he said: Unlike many professionally produced shows, I think I’ve established a much closer contact with my viewers, breaking the wall between the viewer and what’s behind the screen ... What I and other YouTubers do is a very diferent thing ... My fans care in a diferent way about what they are watching (Grundberg & Hansegard, 2014). Sugg also recognised the importance of creating an environment relatable to viewers when she explained: You want to make it a cozy environment and put in your own personal touches. I just sit on the edge of my bed because for me your bed is the coziest place to be, and you want people watching to feel as comfortable as you are ilming (Tan, 2015: 98). Sugg’s and Kjellberg’s approach to YouTube has helped them attract not only brands that want to work with them, but also loyal viewership. YouTube has more American viewers between the ages 18-49 than any cable network, helping increase its revenue by an estimated $1 billion over the last year (Luscombe, 2015). YouTubers have the attention advertisers and cable networks desire, as explained by Burling (2015:22): “book publishers are starting to pay more attention to a form of expression that has exploded over the past decade: ictional web series and vlogging, or video blogging, found mostly on YouTube. Why? hat’s 55 Margaret Holland where the kids are”. YouTube is now the ultimate destination for kids logging on to the Internet. Luscombe (2015:72) points out, mentioning an anecdote: “Variety asked a bunch of teens to choose their favorite stars among 20 names, the top ive were all from YouTube”. With consistent views from a critical mass of audience, YouTube has created an opportunity for the average person to build his or her personal brand. According to Kozinets and Cerone (2014:21): “Social branding has been creating grassroots ‘micro-celebrities’ with increasing frequency. For personal branders, being storytellers who are capable, yet fascinating and even fantastic is a sound strategy”. he inluence of a YouTuber’s personal brand is demonstrated through the success of brands collaborating with content creators. Method In this study the author points at particular elements within the videos of three prominent YouTubers and the structure of their channels. he YouTubers were selected based on Lavaveshkul’s (2012) study, which analysed the top 10 most subscribed to YouTube channels of 2012. hese 10 channels could be divided into three categories of gaming, comedy, or how-to. he current study selected one channel from each category based on their popularity on YouTube. he three YouTubers were Felix Kjellberg (gaming), Grace Helbig (comedy), and Zoe Sugg (how-to). For the study the author developed questions, based on the studies of Lavaveshkul (2012) and Biel and Gatica-Perez (2011). Some answers were found by examining the videos of the three YouTubers on November 9 and 10, 2015. Others were found from Social Blade, a statistics website that tracks growth across social media platforms including YouTube (“Track YouTube”, 2015). The channel´s common characteristics: Layout, location, upload schedule and profit he current author analysed the layout of the three YouTubers’ landing pages. Both Sugg and Kjellberg featured logos on their channel. Helbig instead displayed her uploading schedule and a slogan stating, “What a Charming Idiot” on her banner. Only Kjellberg displayed advertising on the landing page of his channel. For example, his banner advertised his book, his Book Loves You, which was released in October 2015. Instead 56 How YouTube Developed into a Successful Platform for User-Generated Content of a commercial playing, a banner advertisement was displayed at the bottom of Kjellberg’s video. Sugg and Helbig displayed an advertisement in their most recent videos before the clip began. At the time of examination the three YouTubers shared similarities, like their ilming location, which is primarily inside their homes. Sugg sat at the end of her bed while Helbig and Kjellberg usually sat at a desk. Kjellberg (gaming), Sugg (how-to), and Helbig (comedy) represented diferent categories, and all three YouTubers talked about objects within their videos. Kjellberg made commentary while playing a video game. Sugg’s content involved baking, hauling items from a store, or talking about her favourite items throughout the month. Helbig used objects the least among the three, but she posted a variety of comedic reviews or how-to videos. Each YouTuber linked their various social media sites to the landing page of their YouTube channel. hey all began posting content more than ive years ago. Kjellberg, Sugg, and Helbig each has their own individual uploading schedule. Kjellberg uploads content most oten, with at least one daily video. he three YouTubers earn income through advertisements placed on their videos, brand deals, and additional projects that generated proit. Data collected about their subscribers, overall channel views, views per month and estimated yearly income as of October 2015 was outlined in the following diagramme. YouTubers outside their channels Following their fame the three YouTubers have also appeared in TVshows, magazines and even been portrayed in wax at Madame Tussauds in London (Sugg). Outside of her channel, Sugg has launched a cosmetic product range and written two novels, Girl Online and Girl Online: On Table 1. Some characteristics of three influential YouTubers YouTuber Subscribers Channel Views Kjellberg Views per Month Estimated Yearly Income 40,315,481 10,341,904,335 29.6 million Sugg 9,458,481 586,711,156 22.95 million $64.6k-$1M Helbig 2,781,292 156,687,601 7.51 million $22.6K – $361.1K Source: SocialBlade.com and YouTube.com on November 15, 2015 57 $1M-$16.5M Margaret Holland Tour. She has appeared on TV-shows and the cover of Seventeen Magazine. In 2013 and 2014 Sugg won “Best British Vlogger” at the Radio 1 Teen Awards among several other awards. In addition to uploading YouTube videos, Helbig host a podcast, and has appeared in TV-shows, commercials as well as published books. Kjellberg has also involved in outside projects such as releasing a book and a video game. Discussion YouTube’s transformation from video sharing to profitability All three YouTubers began posting videos over ive years ago. Helbig began posting content in October 2006, just one year ater the site was developed and around the same time Google purchased YouTube. According to Kim (2012:57): Since being purchased by Google, YouTube has adopted a new e-commerce model; it puts banner ads in videos or in YouTube pages and shares the revenue with the copyright holders of the videos. he basic idea of selling banner advertisements is to play commercials during the streaming of videos. All three featured advertisements in their videos. Over the past decade, YouTube has become a launching pad for careers (Luscombe, 2015). Based on the videos watched throughout this study, Kjellberg, Sugg, and Helbig all mention that they use their videos as a source of income. At the time of examination (November 9-10, 2015) Kjellberg was the most subscribed user on YouTube, with over 40 million subscribers and 10 billion overall views on his channel (“Track YouTube”, 2015). His videos generated more views than the world’s population, which was then a little over seven billion (“Worldometers”, 2015). According to Grundberg, “he 24-year-old Mr. Kjellberg, who created PewDiePie ive years ago, had parlayed his persona into a brand name that pulls in the equivalent of $4 million in ad sales a year, most of it pure profit” (2014). As reported by Business Insider, most YouTubers get paid through advertisements, previews, and sponsored videos. Side projects, such as book deals, also add to their income (Kosof, 2015). Kjellberg, Helbig, and Sugg all had advertisements display throughout their videos in addition to book deals. Sugg’s book, Girl Online, “broke the record 58 How YouTube Developed into a Successful Platform for User-Generated Content for highest irst-week sales for a debut author in the U.K., selling 78,109 copies-besting J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter titles and E.L. James’ Fity Shades of Grey” (Burling, 2015:24). What began as a place for Sugg, Helbig, and Kjellberg to upload videos as a hobby is now their career. Appeal to viewers It is presumably the YouTubers’ authencity that appeal to their viewers. Strangelove (2010:113) explain, “here is no one authoritative YouTube identity, but there is one dominant YouTube community-the community of amateur videographers. heir numbers will most likely always exceed those of participating celebrities and media corporations”. Each YouTuber analysed in this study began as an everyday person posting videos online, ilmed inside their homes, having conversations with a camera through vlogging (video blogging). In keeping with Burgess and Green (2009:54): he vlog reminds us of the residual character of interpersonal faceto-face communication ... it is a form whose persistent direct address to the viewer inherently invites feedback ... Traditional media content doesn’t explicitly invite conversational and inter-creative participation. According to Sörman, founder of a YouTuber network in Sweden, “PewDiePie is like a cool friend you have and subscribing to him is almost like Skyping with him-that’s why viewers are such dedicated fans” (Grundberg & Hansegard, 2014). All three link their other social media accounts to their YouTube channel to interact with viewers. Kjellberg’s fans, or “bros” as he calls them, are engaged because he takes the time to talk about them in videos or answer their questions (Kosof, 2015). Helbig and Sugg do the same and create an online community for their fans. Strangelove (2010:105) explains, “Participation in online groups leads to a psychological sense of community. People can be deeply engaged in online communities … On YouTube we ind groups of individuals who interact around shared interests”. Sugg’s advice for creating content on YouTube is “to be yourself and have fun. If you’re not having fun, no one is going to have fun watching your videos” (Tan, 2015:98). Creating an enjoyable, personable environment distinguishes these YouTubers. hey are being themselves and establishing an environment where the viewer feels as though they are listening to their friend. Within this environment viewers are able to engage with an online community that enjoys similar content. 59 Margaret Holland Qualities of successful YouTubers On the qualities that these three inluential YouTubers share, the study found the following: Helbig, Sugg, and Kjellberg invited viewers into their personal space by ilming in their homes. According to Biel and Gatica-Perez, “Although conversational vlogging is obviously not exclusive of YouTube, the forms of social engagement inherent in vlogging are key features that distinguish YouTube as a platform for creativity and participation around video, rather than just a repository and distribution system” (Biel & Gatica-Perez, 2011). his allows for diverse content within each YouTuber’s category. Each YouTuber in this study used two elements, background music and objects, throughout their videos. Instrumental background music was speciic to each YouTuber and helped to move along the dialogue. Although objects varied for each YouTuber, all three were talking about something speciic in their videos. he videos uploaded by each YouTuber in this study varied in length; however, the average video length did not exceed 20 minutes. Although Sugg’s content is about twice as long as Helbig’s and Kjellberg’s, it is still signiicantly shorter than a traditional 30-minute television programme. According to Kim (2012:53), “YouTube has come to represent what video on the web looks like: short, mostly humorous, and easily accessible”. Uploading schedules for each YouTuber varied; however, each individual posts at least once a week. Each YouTuber has developed their own schedule so their viewers know when to expect content. heir viewers consist of a younger demographic, as “YouTube is the ultimate destination for kids logging on the Internet. It pretty much owns kids’ eyeballs at this point. One of its core demographics is 8 to 17 years old” (Luscombe, 2015). Personal branding through traditional media Regarding YouTubers’ reliance on traditional media, this study found their personal brand became even more inluential by collaborating with traditional media. Helbig’s YouTube channel included segments from her television show, he Grace Helbig Show. A traditional network broadcasting her show (E! Entertainment) utilised user-generated content to gain younger viewers. 60 How YouTube Developed into a Successful Platform for User-Generated Content Although YouTube draws in more viewers, traditional media is not going anywhere. According to Strangelove (2010:168-169): Amateur video’s proliferation of quick thrills and brief clips also feeds into an attention-deicit generation ... Fragmentation in itself does not spell doom for television. In the end, even though contemporary audience is highly fragmented, it is still watching commercially produced entertainment. YouTubers are not trying to end professionally generated media with their user-generated content. Sugg, Helbig, and Kjellberg are not exclusive to YouTube. hey are on television, winning Teen Choice Awards, and each have a published book. To build their personal brand and audience, they have taken advantage of traditional media in addition to their YouTube channel. Summary In conclusion, YouTube has evolved from a website where users simply upload content to a platform where an individual can build their career. An analysis of popular YouTubers explains why viewers ind videos from Helbig, Sugg, and Kjellberg entertaining. Regardless of their category, they all shared similar video elements. YouTube is the world’s third most popular online destination because viewers, especially those of a younger demographic, can relate to the authenticity of user-generated content. Once established, in addition to their own content, popular YouTubers are utilising traditional media to build their personal brand. hey can be found on bookshelves, on the television screen, and even in a wax museum. With jobs that rely on viewers, it is easy to question the longevity of online careers. YouTube has transformed in 10 years from a site where content was shared to a place where user-generated content thrives. According to Luscombe (2015:75), “Not only must the company contend with youth-savvy tech irms – your Snapchats, your Spotifys, your Vines – but established media companies are onto the fact that kids are just future users”. As their young viewers grow older, Margaret Holland, Undergraduate Student, Communications, Elon University, United States, Mholland8@elon.edu 61 Margaret Holland each YouTuber is faced with the problem of appealing to older loyal fans while still attracting new viewers. Strangelove (2010:107) explain, “Above all, what the moment of YouTube highlights is the uncertainty surrounding the future of participatory culture, and the complexity arising from the intersection of various changing and competing ideas about what digital media are, or could be, for”. Notes 1. 2. 3. https://www.youtube.com/user/PewDiePie https://www.youtube.com/user/zoella280390 https://www.youtube.com/user/graciehinabox References Biel, Joan-Isaac & Gatica-Perez, Daniel (2010, May). VlogSense: Conversational Behavior and Social Attention in YouTube. ACM Transactions on. Multimedia Computing, Communications and Applications. 2(3), 1-20. Burgess, Jean & Green, Joshua (2009). YouTube: Online Video and Participatory Culture. Cambridge, England: Polity. I-54. Burling, Alexis (2015). Book Publishing Comes to YouTube. Publishers Weekly, 262(7), 22-26. Grundberg, Sven & Hansegard, Jens (2014). YouTube’s Biggest Draw Plays Games, Earns $4 Million a Year. he Wall Street Journal, 16 June 2014 [online]. Available at <http://www.wsj.com/articles/youtube-star-plays- videogames-earns-4-million-a-year-1402939896> [Accessed 10 November 2015]. Helbig, Grace (2014). Grace’s Guide: he Art of Pretending to Be a Grown-Up. New York: Touchstone. Helbig, Grace (2016). Grace & Style: he Art of Pretending You Have It. New York: Touchstone. Kain, Erik (2014). YouTuber ‘PewDiePie’ is Making $4 Million a Year. Forbes, 18 June 2014 [online]. Available at <http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2014/06/18/ youtuber-pewdiepie-is-making-4-million-a-year>. [Accessed 10 November 2015]. Kim, Jin (2012). he Institutionalization of YouTube: From User-Generated Content to Professionally Generated Content. Media, Culture & Society 34(1), 53-67. Kosoff, Maya (2015). Meet the YouTube Millionaires: These are the Highest-Paid YouTube Stars of 2015. Business Insider, 15 October 2015. Available at <http:// Acknowledgement An earlier version of this article was originally published in the Spring 2016 issue of the Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications. he author would like to extend thanks to Kenn Gaither, associate professor and associate dean at Elon University, for his constant guidance throughout this process, without which this article could not have been written. he author also thanks the School of Communications and the many reviewers who have helped revise this article. 62 How YouTube Developed into a Successful Platform for User-Generated Content www.businessinsider.com/youtube-stars-who-make- the-most-money-2015-10>. [Accessed 10 November 2015]. Kozinets, Robert & Cerone, Stefano (2014). Between the Suit and the Selie: Executives’ Lessons on the Social “Micro-Celebrity”. GFK Marketing Intelligence Review 6(2), 21. Lavaveshkul, Liz (2012). How to Achieve 15 Minutes (or more) of Fame hrough YouTube. Jornal of International Commercial Law and Technology, 7, 370. Luscombe, Belinda (2015). You Tube’s View Master. Time, 186(9/10), 70-75. Morreale, Joanne (2014). From Homemade to Store Bought: Annoying Orange and the Professionalization of YouTube. Journal of Consumer Culture 14(1), 113-128. NBC (2015). How Grace Helbig’s Mom Scared Her Straight as a Child. [online]. Available at <http://www.nbc.com/the-tonight-show/video/how-grace-helbigs-mom-scaredher-straight- as-a-child/2855128>. [Accessed 10 November 2015]. PewDiePie (2015). his Book Loves You. London: Penguin Books. Social Blade (2015). Social Blade YouTube Stats. [online]. Available at <http://socialblade. com>. [Accessed 11 November 2015]. Stedman, Alex (2015). YouTube Star Grace Helbig’s Talk show gets Series Order from E! Variety, 5 January 2015 [online]. Available at <http://variety.com/2015/digital/news/ youtube-star-grace-helbigs-talk-show- gets-series-order-from-e-1201392834/>. [Accessed 14 November 2015]. Strangelove, Michael (2010). Watching YouTube Extraordinary Videos by Ordinary People. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Sugg, Zoe (2014). Girl Online. London: Penguin Books. Sugg, Zoe (2015). Girl Online: On Tour. New York: Keywords Press/Atria. Tan, Michelle (2015, October 1). Girl Of-Line. Seventeen Magazine, 94-98. he Great Comic Relief Bake Of. BBC, 22 February 2015 [online]. Available at http:// www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b053h69. [Accessed 15 November 2015]. Worldometers (2015). Real Time World Statistics. [online]. Available at <http://www. worldometers.info>. [Accessed 15 November 2015]. 63 Margaret Holland Appendix Coding Sheet General information 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Name of YouTuber: Date Retrieved: Location while Filming: Does the person have a logo? Is there advertising on the page? Questions 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 64 What is their most popular video? What is their total subscriber amount on the day the information is retrieved? When did they begin posting videos? How do they describe themselves in their ‘about’ section? What is the total amount of channel views? What is the total view per month as of October 2015? What other forms of social media do they promote on their landing page? What is the overall “theme” of their channel? How many videos do they have uploaded? What are their estimated yearly earnings? Does this person have an uploading schedule? Based on their last 10 videos, what is the average length of one of their videos? What are some of their brand deals or projects outside of their channel? 5 Top Girls on YouTube Identity, Participation, and Consumption Lidia Marôpo, Inês Vitorino Sampaio & Nut Pereira de Miranda el Cerer (8 years old), Juliana Baltar (9 years old), Manoela Antelo (10 years old) and Júlia Silva (11 years old)1 are prominent representatives of a phenomenon that has recently become widespread in the Brazilian context as well as internationally: child YouTube stars. Besides the fact that they author original content, these girls share characteristics that distinguish them from millions of other “video author” children (Yarosh et al., 2016) on YouTube – the second most visited website in the world ater Google (Alexa, 2016). he four girls have their own YouTube channels, are very popular among peers, challenge the boundaries between amateurishness and professionalism, and make a proit from the videos they star in. In December 2016, Júlia and Manoela exceeded a million subscribers to their YouTube channels, while Juliana had more than two million and Bel nearly three million. hey became popular by posting similar content in which marketing communication is oten present – toys and children’s product reviews, unboxing, challenges among peers and adults, and web series. Today, they are also the most popular among hundreds of YouTuber girls who have attained public recognition. he four of them are seen as celebrities in Brazil, attract thousands of fans at meetings organized by sponsor companies, and appear on lists (disclosed by the media) of the most inluential children in the nation. B 65 Marôpo, Lidia; Vitorino Sampaio, Inês & de Miranda, Nut Pereira (2017). Top Girls on YouTube. Identity, Participation, and Consumption in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Lidia Marôpo, Inês Vitorino Sampaio & Nut Pereira de Miranda What kinds of content do these children author and share on YouTube? What are the speciic characteristics of their online performances? What are their similarities and diferences? What identities do they reproduce and/or re-signify about what it means to be a child and a girl? In what ways is marketing communication present in their YouTube videos? Taking into account the fast expansion of the Internet as a “space” for children to “learn, participate, play and socialise” (Livingstone & Bulger, 2014), we will discuss these questions based on an exploratory study. he corpus analyzed consists of the channels maintained by the four YouTuber girls with higher numbers of subscribers in Brazil, considering only those aged under 12, according to data available on YouTube in 2016. Forty-eight videos posted in 2016 were selected, chosen through the method of random sampling, in alternate weeks. Observation of their formats and content was employed. Among these videos, the four most viewed from each YouTuber in each trimester – which totals 16 videos – was examined in more detail. he analysis focused on the following aspects: formats, themes, performances, communication strategies (types, forms of address, interactivity, etc.) and modes of participation. Children on YouTube: Uses and participation In 2015, eight in ten children and adolescents (aged 9 to 17) were Internet users in Brazil (CGI, 2016). On average, they were connected 4 hours and 59 minutes a day during the course of a week, an amount that surpasses the time spent watching television (Secom, 2015). On YouTube, speciically, the engagement of children and teenagers is highly signiicant, as either authors or audiences. he results from a survey conducted by the American investment bank Piper Jafray in 2016 with more than ten thousand teenagers in the US indicate that teens spend more time watching YouTube videos than cable television (Ferreras, 2016). Another recent survey on YouTube’s young Brazilian audience (aged 0 to 12) shows that, among the 230 channels analyzed in the survey, the majority of views are of YouTube’s own videos – 44,266 billion versus 7.898 billion views of YouTube channels originating in television programming (Silva, 2016). hese channels were classiied into seven categories indicating the types of content consumed (and authored) by children on YouTube: Mi66 Top Girls on YouTube necrat and others (games and vlogs of games); TV (from broadcast and cable television); Non-TV (created for YouTube); Unboxing (children or adults opening boxes or toys’ wrapping papers); Teen YouTubers (people over 12 years of age); Child YouTubers (0-12 years old); and Educational. Minecrat and others is the most popular category with 52 per cent of total views, whereas Child YouTubers was the second most popular, but had more audience growth between 2015 and 2016 (564 per cent) – the irst in this category being Unboxing, with 975 per cent growth. In this context of intense connectivity (Mascheroni & Ólafsson, 2014), answering questions like “who am I?”, “what could I be?”, “who do I want to be?” is strongly inluenced by media pervasiveness (Woodward, 1997:14). he digital media, especially social networking sites, is seen as a powerful tool for the youngest to express themselves, to interact, and to negotiate collective and individual identities (Drotner, 1992; Buckingham, 2008; Buckingham & Willett, 2006; Livingstone & Bulger, 2014). From this perspective, the YouTuber girls’ channels may be seen as a means of self-representation and dissemination of their points of view, ideas and creativity in the public space. Conducting ethnographic research on the uses of YouTube by children and teenagers (aged 10-18) in America, Lange (2014:68) noted several ways that girls participate in the production of videos for this platform. Video blogging, sketch comedy, lip-synching, personal event videos, and hanging-out-at-home videos are the most popular. he participants in the study discussed numerous themes, such as relections about their school, challenges they face, music, pets, and so forth. For the author, video-blogs promote the expression of girls’ voices, and oten allow the disclosure of issues relevant for their lives. On the other hand, Dantas and Godoy (2016:98) assert that in some cases, children’s channels might be considered a (semi) professional activity conditioned to the marketing interests of the brands that sponsor them. From this perspective, they raise problematic issues for the young video authors, such as exploitation of child labor. he activity, according to Dantas and Godoy (2016:98), “demands a schedule of appointments, a duty to be regular with their video-posting, an obligation to disclose the products received from the brands, among other responsibilities”. Furthermore, it might expose the child audience to improper marketing content and stimulate consumerism, among other problems (Postman, 1994). 67 Lidia Marôpo, Inês Vitorino Sampaio & Nut Pereira de Miranda Rebekah Willett (2008) asserts that children and teenagers are not being encouraged to exercise self-expression; rather, they are constructing identities aligned with a consumer culture. Nonetheless, she recognizes that children and teenagers play an active role in their engagement with the Internet, even in such an intense commercial context. he author then launches a challenge: to analyze the online content authored by children, taking into account the power and inluence of the market, but without neglecting children’s agency. Willet (2008:53) brings in the concept of “bricolage”, from Lévi-Strauss, to analyze how child YouTubers use varied resources while transforming and re-contextualizing diferent cultural products to create a new self-image or identity. he child YouTubers have their own “channels” on YouTube, similar to an online proile on other social networking sites, containing a list of subscribers, information such as the number of “thumbs up” and “thumbs down” they have received, and statistics on views. Some of them reach signiicant popularity as video authors by broadcasting information about their identities, crafting videos with appealing content, and publicly and intensively promoting and disseminating their videos (Lange, 2008). According to Félix (2016: 02), “being a YouTuber is more than simply sitting in front of a camera once a week to record a 15-minute video with apparently improvised content”. his task, according to the author, demands strategies such as inding a target audience, mastering technological tools to monitor competitors, interpreting Google Trends to identify keywords to describe the video and facilitate its delivery to the target audience, and possessing skills in the production and post-production of audiovisual language. Besides interacting with the audience on YouTube and other social media, their investment also includes participating in oline activities, such as book-launching parties and advertising campaign events. he YouTubers’ strategies also include knowing which mechanisms generate more advertising revenue. he channels’ owners must join the YouTube Partner Program and sign a contract that enables brand advertisement on their videos and thus the monetization of their content. Omar Ricón (as cited in Félix 2016:02) highlights six common YouTuber strategies for achieving popularity: Narrative – talking directly to the camera, aiming to break the formality of television; Aesthetic – 68 Top Girls on YouTube using irony, cynicism, and irreverence to make people laugh; Language – using slang, seeking grotesque and emotional appeal through swear words; Youthfulness - taking youths’ attitudes and manners seriously, which are also the basis for their comments on life; Pop savvy – their references are rooted on pop music, best-sellers and fast food; and Adult world – regarding it as corrupt and inept (politicians), incompetent (parents), or outdated (teachers). he youths use their witty humor as a tactic to express disappointment with adults. In her ethnographic study, Lange (2014:16) deines YouTube as a “personally expressive media”, i.e., “any mediated artifact or set of media that enables a creator to communicate aspects of the self ”. According to her, regular YouTube video authors perform technical ailiations while showing through words or actions their beliefs, values or practices, which connect them with particular technical-cultural groups. In this sense they form communities of practice, which include routines, conventions, and shared histories. he researcher also highlights the diverse interests between child YouTubers, who have diferent “mediated centers of gravity” (Lange, 2014:41); i.e., their preferences manifest themselves in visible inclinations to certain content, abilities and media tools. Although she criticizes the lack of transparency in YouTube’s advertising policy, Lange (2014: 134) maintains that commercialization is not incompatible with either genuine family afection – present in many YouTube videos – or learning processes among those who author content. In her research, children and young adults assert that they have developed technical knowledge for making videos and have improved their self-conidence and capability for self-presentation to a wider audience. On the other hand, some of them reveal feelings of social exclusion due to the time they dedicate to the activity, which distances them from their peers. Top girls on YouTube: Identity negotiations in the network We can look at the four girls under analysis as a “community of practice” (Lange, 2014) that shares numerous common features. Bel, Juliana, Manoela and Júlia maintain their YouTube channel pages on a regular basis, posting videos daily (Bel), three times a week (Júlia) or once a week (Manoela and Juliana). All of them are present on various social 69 Lidia Marôpo, Inês Vitorino Sampaio & Nut Pereira de Miranda networking sites (Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat and/or Twitter), which they use intensively to promote not only their YouTube channels but also their activities in many oline spaces such as meetings with fans, book-launching events, and television programs. he YouTubers’ performances on the Internet show a careful management of their public images. he opening logos in their YouTube videos and the proile pictures on their social media sites indicate an attentive production aimed at creating a visual identity. Júlia Silva’s page on Facebook, for instance, is managed by an advertising agency, which is also responsible for the social media sites of numerous Brazilian television and Internet celebrities. he popularity of these four YouTuber girls on the Internet also means visibility in traditional media. All of them have been interviewed on news programs and participated in other popular television programs. his legitimates their roles as opinion makers among their peers. heir families receive revenue from the ads broadcasted on YouTube. Moreover, the girls earn toys and other products merchandised in the videos, not to mention the indirect gains through trips and hotel stays. In this sense, we call attention to the considerable time the girls dedicate to YouTuber activities and the demands related to the popularity they have achieved and want to promote. he analysis demonstrates a limited variety of formats in the videos made by the four YouTubers, which include “vlogs”, “iction”, “commercial”, “challenges” and “tutorials”. Among these, the most common and with the most views is “iction”. his is comprised of “web series”, in many cases revealing creativity in improvised scenarios and stories (such videos are apparently elaborated by the YouTubers themselves, except for Bel, who explicitly has her mother’s help). On the other hand, some of the videos give rise to a questioning of gender or social class stereotypes, as well as ways of dealing with environmental issues. he “challenges” are another popular format among the YouTubers. Manoela Antelo and her Uncle Bibi (Luan Novit, also a YouTuber), for example, propose to each other mutual challenges which may include dancing in the street, taking selies with strangers, eating a garlic clove, or performing kick-ups with a ball. he competition seems to be less important than having fun. he games appear to reproduce television formats without including any intellectual challenge. 70 Top Girls on YouTube Shopping, reviews or unboxing toys, included in the “commercial” category, are also popular formats among the YouTubers. Here, the marketing communication appears in explicit ways. In “tutorial” videos, the YouTubers give instructions for building toys or playing games, whereas in the “vlog” format they record different life experiences, either alone or with friends and family, such as hanging out or taking trips. References to brands are also common in the aforementioned two formats. he concept of “community of practice” (Lange, 2014) is also useful for describing the similarities between their online performances. All four girls have a role model with whom they regularly perform – mother (Bel), sister (Juliana), uncle (Manoela), and father (Júlia); they all use particular forms of greetings (e.g. “hello everyone”) and farewells (e.g. “strawberry/chocolate sweet little kisses”) to communicate with the audience; they continuously ask for the public’s approval and attention (by asking for “thumbs up” and subscriptions); and they use their own home spaces as scenarios for most of their videos. We can also identify the adaptation of some of the strategies mentioned earlier (Rincón cited in Félix, 2016:02) that the YouTubers use to become popular. he four girls talk directly to the camera and, sometimes, make use of irony and irreverence to provoke laughter; in some cases, they appeal to the grotesque (especially in ictional content or challenges); they cultivate pop-culture savvy (with references to music and celebrities); and they are attentive to peers’ attitudes and behaviors. However, if we think of YouTube as a “personally expressive media” (Lange, 2014), through a more careful analysis of the girls’ performances we can identify diferent forms of communication that reveal diverse “mediated centers of gravity” (Lange, 2014: 41). Bel is the youngest and the one who shows the least autonomy, almost always appearing accompanied by her mother, Fran Cerer. Fran, for the most part, assumes the protagonist role in the videos, performing, playing, and guiding her daughter in a cooperative manner, and also, sometimes, in a professorial way toward the audience. heir most popular videos have six million views. Most of these are web series with the format of “cautionary tales” (on themes such as jealousy between siblings, disliking bath time, loss of baby teeth, bullying, irst day of school, tantrums, etc.). Mother and daughter also propose challenges 71 Lidia Marôpo, Inês Vitorino Sampaio & Nut Pereira de Miranda to each other and switch roles. he marketing communication appears in some content, such as when Fran publicized the work of a tourism agency that organizes trips to Disney. Juliana Baltar is the protagonist of the two most viewed videos among the four YouTubers, namely “Baby Alive has an accident in the Tyrolean traverse” and “Baby Alive is admitted to the Hospital!” (translations from Portuguese). he videos have 53 million and 48 million views, respectively (February 2016), and both privilege ictional narratives in improvised and creative scenarios, in which the doll is the protagonist. As a common strategy among the child YouTube stars, the commercial names of the dolls are identiied in the titles of the videos, a tactic that seems to have strongly contributed to this impressive popularity. Besides exploring formats such as “challenges” and “life experiences”, Juliana uses the tag #jujuresponde (#jujuanswers) to talk to the audience in a confessional manner about varied aspects of her life (her relationship with her parents and sister Rafaella Baltar, also a YouTuber, with whom she frequently performs in the videos; her dream of being a YouTuber, etc.). he marketing communication arises mainly in the videos tagged as “shopping” and “received”, in which she shows objects she has bought or received. Manoela Antelo oten performs with her Uncle Bibi in videos in which challenges, humor, and mockery are common. hey have fun and play together in equal positions while interacting with each other. Manoela also makes regular videos about her daily life, in which familial relationships are exposed in apparently spontaneous contexts. he marketing communication appears mainly in her videos about hanging out and taking sponsored trips. Júlia Silva has a more moderate style, and distinguishes herself through reined scenarios; better quality of image, edition and audiovisual efects; life experiences connected to a higher level of income (such as international trips and expensive brands); and access to celebrities from television, whom she interviews on her channel. She mainly performs with her “Dad Silva” in challenges and games. She also makes web series and tutorials about handicrat, makeup, recipes, and fashion tips. he marketing communication is present in toy reviews, games and apps, as well as in sponsored trips and hanging out. It also appears in her vlogs, such as in the video “Getting braces put on! Does it hurt??? Julia Silva” (translated from Portuguese), in which she dis- 72 Top Girls on YouTube closes the name of the dental clinic she attended. Besides this channel she also maintains another, “Júlia Silva TV”, dedicated exclusively to the “commercial” format. Discussion and conclusion Considering the set of elements presented up to this point, we can say that the identities created by the four YouTubers, as a “narrative of the self ” (Giddens, 2002), become immediately singular in relation to other numerous anonymous children. heir identities are not only being redeined in their spontaneous relationships with their relatives and friends, but are managed with the aim of achieving public recognition measured by the number of views, comments, and “thumbs up”. We are facing a game of forces, in which the YouTubers’ participation, creativity and spontaneity are juxtaposed with the pressures of a planned professional management of their public images, in which the goal is obtaining popularity and inancial proit. On the one hand the channels are a potential space for the expression of children’s identities and cultures, in which the girls play and talk about subjects of common interest among their peers (toys, hanging out, relationship with family and friends, school, and relevant experiences in the child universe, such as the irst day of school, loss of baby teeth, arrival of a new sibling, etc.). hrough this content, they achieve great visibility for their points of view. From this perspective, it is important to highlight the children’s creative potential, which manifests itself in narratives, improvisation of scenarios, re-signiication of objects, etc. he protagonist role they play in the videos and the more egalitarian position they assume in relation to the adults with whom they perform might be understood as possibilities of empowerment, which distance them from the role of fragile and helpless children. In addition, their participation in videos and other numerous online and oline activities may be seen as an opportunity to improve their skills of self-presentation and help them develop technical capabilities for audiovisual production. heir public activities also provide them with life experience and access to places they likely would not have visited otherwise. On the other hand, the analyzed YouTubers show a strong inluence from marketing communication and mainstream media formats, 73 Lidia Marôpo, Inês Vitorino Sampaio & Nut Pereira de Miranda evidenced in the exaltation of consumer habits connected to brands, seen in formats (challenges and series); in the “making of ” at the end of some videos; in sound and visual professional efects; in the use of jargon and standardized gestures to demonstrate afection; and in appeals to build a loyal audience. he act of playing, in this context of intense commodiication of the content they author, is easily transformed into an “obligation” due to the demands for frequency in video-sharing, commitments to sponsors, and a busy schedule. he time they apparently dedicate to the activity, the inancial proit generated from diferent marketing communication strategies, and the professionalism in the management of their actions indicate that this activity could be characterized as child labor. here are also signs that the child and female identity they promote builds strong connections to a consumer culture, related not only to toys and children’s products but also to beauty products and other adult-related manufactured goods. Moreover, having popularity as one of their main goals in authoring content (as demonstrated in their insistent appeals to their audiences) might make them overestimate fame and success as their goal for the present and future, promoting a narcissist identity. Our analysis reveals a conluence of the YouTubers’ singular and individual characteristics with performances collectively originated and managed as a community of practice (Lange, 2014), which are translated into formats, content, and common strategies, in a process of bricolage (Willet, 2008) profoundly inluenced by a consumer culture. he four channels can also be seen as spaces broadcasting models of thinking and acting to the wider public of children and teenagers who accompany them regularly. Note 1. Ages in December 2016. Lidia Marôpo, Ph.D., Polytechnic Institute of Setúbal and Interdisciplinary Centre of Social Sciences/Nova University of Lisbon (CICS.NOVA), Portugal, lidia.maropo@ ese.ips.pt Inês Vitorino Sampaio, Ph.D., Instituto de Cultura e Arte, Federal University of Ceará (UFC), Brazil, ines@ufc.br Nut Pereira de Miranda, Master Candidate, Instituto de Cultura e Arte, Federal University of Ceará (UFC), Brazil, nutpereira@gmail.com 74 Top Girls on YouTube References Alexa (2016). About web site views. [online]. Available at <http://www.alexa.com/topsites>. [Accessed 12 February, 2016]. Buckingham, David (2008). Youth, Identity, and Digital Media. Cambridge: MIT Press. Buckingham, David; Willett, Rebekah (2006). Digital Generations: Children, Young People, and New Media. Nova Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. CGI (2016). About the use of the Internet by children and adolescents in Brazil. [online]. Available at <http://www.cetic.br/media/docs/publicacoes/2/TIC_Kids_2015_LIVRO_ELETRONICO.pdf >. [Accessed 12 January, 2017]. Dantas, haís; Godoy, Renato (2016). Youtubers mirins: mera expressão artística ou trabalho infantil? [Youtubers kids: mere artistic expression or child labor?]. pp. 95-104 in Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil. Pesquisa sobre o uso da internet por crianças e adolescentes no Brasil: TIC Kids online Brasil 2015. Drotner, Kerstin (1992). Modernity and Media Panics, pp. 42-62 in Skovmand, Michael & Kim Christian Schroder (eds.) Media Cultures Reappraising Transnational Media. Londres; Nova Iorque: Routledge. Félix, Claudia (2016). Youtubers: entre la estrategia profesional y la calidad de los contenidos. Revista Zócalo, 25 May, 2016. [online]. Available at <http://www. revistazocalo.com.mx/45-zocalo/10273-youtubers-entre-la-estrategia-profesional-y-la-calidad-de-los-contenidos.html> [Accessed 12 January, 2017]. Ferreras, Jesse (2016). YouTube Beats Cable TV Among Teen Video Choices: Piper Jafray Survey. [online]. he Huington Post, 17 october, 2016. Availabe at <http:// www.huingtonpost.ca/2016/10/17/youtube-cable-tv-teens_n_12529450.html>. [Accessed 12 January, 2017]. Giddens, Anthony (2002). Modernidade e identidade [Modernity and Identity]. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar Ed. Lange, Patricia (2007). Privately Public: Social Networking on YouTube. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1): 361–380. Lange, Patricia (2014). Kids on YouTube: technical identities and digital literacies. London and New York: Routledge. Livingstone, Sonia & Bulger, Monica (2014). Global Research Agenda for Children’s Rights in he Digital Age. Journal of Children and Media, 8(4): 317-335. Mascheroni, Giovanna & Ólafsson, Kjártan (2014). Net Children Go Mobile: Risks and Opportunities. Milano: Educatt. Postman, Neil (1994). he Disappearance of Childhood. New York: Vintage Books. Secom (2015). About habits of media consumption by the Brazilian population. [online]. Available at <http://www.secom.gov.br/atuacao/pesquisa/lista-de-pesquisas-quantitativas-e-qualitativas-de-contratos-atuais/pesquisa-brasileira-de-midia-pbm-2015.pdf >. [Accessed 08 January, 2016]. Silva, Sérgio Damasceno (2016). Audiência infantil no YouTube chega a 52 bi de views. [Children’s YouTube audience reaches 52 billion views]. Meio & Mensagem. 5 October 2016 [online]. Available at <http://www.meioemensagem.com.br/home/ midia/2016/10/05/audiencia-infantil-em-canais-do-youtube-chega-a-52-bilhoesde-views.html>. [Accessed 12 January, 2017]. Willett, Rebekah (2008). Consumer Citizens Online: Structure, Agency, and Gender in Online Participation, pp. 49-70 in Buckingham, David (ed.) Youth, Identity, and Digital Media. Cambridge, MA: he MIT Press. 75 Lidia Marôpo, Inês Vitorino Sampaio & Nut Pereira de Miranda Woodward, Kathryn (1997). Concepts of Identity and Diference, pp. 7-62 in Woodward, Kathryn (ed.) Identity and Diference, London: Sage Publications/he Open University. Yarosh, Svetlana; Bonsignore, Elizabeth; McRoberts, Sarah & Peyton, Tamara (2016). YouthTube: Youth Video Authorship on YouTube and Vine. Paper presented at 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW 2016), February 27-March 02, 2016, at San Francisco, USA. 76 6 The YouTube Channel RAK TV A Narrative Interview with Rachel Cócaro, 14 Years Old Paulo Guimarães & Maria Inês de C. Delorme he initial proposal for this chapter was to talk to young people from Rio de Janeiro aged ten to 14, in order to learn about the creative universe of young YouTubers from Rio. We did not look for YouTubers who were considered “celebrities” or “exceptional” in their use of media, but practices and meanings built by “ordinary” young people who were considered creative based on their productions in the digital sphere. We made a Facebook call among our contacts requesting the names of young producers of media who were active in social networks. hrough this network of contacts, ten young people agreed to participate in the interview. Rachel Cócaro was one of the interviewees. As a practice among researchers of Human Sciences, the meetings were based on the precepts of “narrative interviews” (Delorme, 2008: 34), since this type of methodology favors knowing the person as a whole subject, the protagonist of his/her stories, and as a producer and permanent consumer of culture, with emphasis on his/her media creations. As narrative interviews difer from questionnaires, we do not present questions and answers here but rather blocks of opinions and ideas organized by the researchers, once they have been validated by each of the interviewees. From this point, we came to know Rachel through her media creations presented in various videos, with content of diferent themes, formats, and lengths, shared on a YouTube channel called RAK TV1. T 77 Guimarães, Paulo & de C. Delorme, Maria Inês (2017).The Youtube Channel RAK TV. A Narrative Interview with Rachel Cócaro, 14 Years Old in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Paulo Guimarães & Maria Inês de C. Delorme She stood out through her critical thinking and the ability of seeing herself sometimes within and sometimes outside the universe of YouTubers of her age. In eight of our ten interviews with the young people, there emerged certain recurring themes which we used as categories: autonomy, creativity, YouTube quality, and celebrity/success. hese categories were stressed throughout the interview in Rachel’s ideas about the theoretical fragments to which her ideas refer. Who she is Rachel Cócaro Gouvêa Veiga is a fourteen-year-old girl who lives with her mother and two sisters: iteen-year-old Rebecca and Rachel’s twin sister Raphaela who, when very young, sufered a mechanical asphyxiation that let her with cognitive side-efects: “A mental age of six, seven years.” his sister has not yet learned some things, and her mother “will only let her have a computer when she can read and write. hat’s ok, right? It’s not only cool things that are on the Internet”. To quickly understand who Rachel is, just watch the video “TAG: Twin Sister”2 where she introduces herself and Raphaela, answering fun questions with agility and speed. Rachel’s thinking is fast; it is fun and has the timing of spontaneous joking. On Instagram, Twitter and YouTube her productions are designated as Rak TV in the case of videos on the channel of the same name. his channel name originated from her name which, ending with the letter K, would sound the way she wanted it to [RAK], which would not be the case if she had used the literal abbreviation for it, and [TV] because she is visually exposed and “can be seen on a screen: from a cell phone, from computers or from SMART TVs.” Rachel and her sisters live with their mother, who is a doctor, in the state of Rio de Janeiro, in the city of Niterói. heir parents are separated, and the daughters live alternately with both of them. She attends high school, considers herself good in the Portuguese language, and wishes, whenever possible, to “escape from mathematics”. he three sisters study at a well-known school in Niterói, which is considered an avant-garde school in several aspects, stressing the encouragement of the arts in general as well as sports. Everyone knows Rachel is a YouTuber; her family supports her and encourages her initia- 78 The YouTube Channel RAK TV Image 1. Opening photo of the “Twin Sister” video tive. Her schoolmates are very dear to her, and she believes she is more valued in the school space for liking sports than for being a YouTuber. Rachel enjoys watching TV series, usually on Netlix. She does not like playing on the Internet but claims to have “a competitive spirit”, which justiies “watching and liking Big Brother Brazil, because I’m interested in knowing who will stay and who will leave.” She uses Twitter, Instagram and Snapchat; she also has Facebook but does not like it, and thus does not use it. Her computer, her bedroom and the recordings she makes at home Rachel has her own computer in her bedroom. In this space she improvises a kind of studio, where she records using two lamps attached to a ladder and a Canon T51 camera. She edits her videos on the computer, using the sotware “Final Cut”. When she is producing her videos she feels “tense, worried that her house noises will leak into the recording” and, because of this, believes that “everyone who lives with her knows when she is posting some new video. It’s stressful”. By researching on the Internet she learned how to use the resources for her recordings, as well as how to edit them and make them good enough for her fans: “here’s nothing Google and YouTube don’t teach today, about anything, and for all people”. 79 Paulo Guimarães & Maria Inês de C. Delorme RAK TV, her channel on YouTube Rachel’s channel, which she started in the irst months of 2016, is called RAK TV and ofers around 90 videos of varying duration and format. More than a thousand people have already accessed the channel, including 340 people who have subscribed, although she “doesn’t know, even today, exactly what can leverage success on the Internet”. She once made a video she considered weak, bad, from which she “didn’t expect anything; about cellphone cases. I thought it was a silly one but, to my surprise, it got more than 3,000 likes. Videos where I just talk, with my face showing, have to have challenges to not be boring”. She seeks to always be fun, and this is a personal value she tries to impart in all her videos. In fact, the Rachel we see in the videos is the same young woman who makes herself known in the interview: funny, good-humored, educated, and spontaneous when dancing and talking to her audience. Still, she considers herself very impatient and talks about this in a video called “Impatience”, where she complains about the time she wastes in stores waiting for salespeople to do their sums and give her the change (she is quick with igures, although she hates mathematics). She also complains about the salespeople who do not quickly ind the products she asks for in the shops, as well as advertisements. Her complaints always contain certain “emphatic verbs”, such as “I hate and detest”. In the video “Somebody Help Me?” made from Musical.ly3, a mobile dubbing app, she dubs her favorite songs while dancing; and in another video she presents her playlist to her fans. In reference to vlogs, she has formed an opinion: “I think it’s unnecessary. A 14 or 15-year-old girl telling her story? Isn’t it strange?” She made a successful video called “Types of Teachers”, presenting ive types of teachers in a theatrical and funny way: 1. he bipolar one (confused and contradictory); 2. he one who cannot explain anything (repeating the students’ question); 3. he one who acts like the students’ friend (everyone wants him/her, things proceed in a loose way); 4. he “Out of the room! “ teacher (without a reason, she/he asks the student to leave the room); and 5. he one who is rude to the students for nothing (nasty, does not understand anything, coarse). Rachel studies English in English Culture Class since, for her, speaking English is a prerequisite for being a YouTuber. She uses many words in English during the interview, with a British accent and in correct 80 The YouTube Channel RAK TV Image 2. Opening photo of the video “Types of Teachers” context, such as challenge, playlist, games, download, upload, choice, free media, version, winner, turn and many others. In media, she always appears smiling and wearing lipstick “but only that, and always the same one, because I don’t wear makeup”. In the video “Somebody Help Me?” she answers her fans’ questions about her lipstick: “My lipstick is from the collection Pause for Feminine Time, and its color name is Titânia”, and keeps changing voices, dubbing characters, and playing diferent roles as if it were a question-and answer session, as if she were two diferent people. She dances, quotes other videos, asks for comments, and throws kisses to her fans. She never forgets to thank all the people who post comments on her videos, “even when they call it trash, as one of them has done. One might think it’s bad, but I wouldn’t post trash.” YouTube quality “A quality video, in my opinion, must have several things. It has to be well lit, well edited, and have good sound. It has to be fun; that’s very important. he person must have charisma, because it’s horrible when someone wants to be funny but isn’t. I think you also have to present the content of your age. I don’t like writing about subjects I don’t know very well. I don’t need to have formed an opinion about everything, and if I don’t know the subject I won’t talk about, for example, Nazis on my videos. I like to watch some channels, like “Ater Eleven o’clock”4 by two Brazilians, which is very funny. I also like Taciele Alcolea5, who 81 Paulo Guimarães & Maria Inês de C. Delorme doesn’t have a channel on YouTube but is funny on Snapchat. here’s also the Taynara OG6, who posts ten-second videos. “ About convergence of media Rachel refers to Kéfera7, a successful YouTuber who, “from that success, recorded a ilm – a feature ilm – and it seems like she even wrote a book. Horrible. Being a good YouTuber doesn’t mean you’re a good writer or actress. It was a crappy movie. here’s also JAPA, a well-known YouTuber who suddenly turned up with a book written by a ghostwriter. Do you know what that is? Well, he didn’t even write his book, called Diary of a Japa” (Japa= diminutive of Japanese). At this point, Rachel’s statements bring us closer to what we call media convergence. Jenkins (2009) points out: “YouTube has emerged as a key site for the production and distribution of alternative media – the ground zero, so to speak – of the rupture in commercial mass media operations, caused by the emergence of new forms of participatory culture” (p. 348). In other words, beyond the commercial interests that generate expectations of inancial gain, today it is no longer possible to speak of producers and consumers of media as if they had dissociated roles; they must rather be seen “as participants interacting according to a new set of rules, which none of us fully understand”(p. 30). In this sense, what Rachel says not only highlights YouTube and the participation in it that “occurs at three diferent levels, in this case: production, selection and distribution” (Jenkins, 2009, p. 349), but also points to new paths by raising both the research on and analysis of each media in a more speciic way, and questioning the ways in which subjects interact with them. Creativity Rachel feels she has been creative in many moments in her life, for instance at school when using paintbrushes and paint, developing her artistic pursuits, but says, “you just want to be creative but sometimes you’re not. When you strive, sometimes you’re not and, besides that, creativity can be found in the simplest things. At times, and most oten, chatting leisurely with friends at school gives you a diferent idea that generates a good video. Never at home, only with friends from school”. 82 The YouTube Channel RAK TV herefore, for her, being creative is not something that can be translated or even channeled simply as an action. he elements (themes) of the production of content for the network are identiied in her everyday relationships and in interaction with others. At the same time, she does not refer to creativity when talking about her clothes, saying she likes to customize, give them a unique and personal touch, and doing the same thing with her cellphone covers. She is also creative and unique in the way she dresses. Image 3. Clothes customized by Rachel On YouTube, she feels she is creative when she “has an idea no one has had yet,” or when posting something that already exists “but in a very diferent, original way. Original? Yes, when I defend my own opinions”! She posts her videos “when it’s possible, when I can. All it takes is for me to mark a day and time and I get tense; for me it doesn’t work”; i.e., for her there is no creativity in having a pre-established day and time. In general, she posts three videos a month and, sometimes, more than this. “Not everything can be done or played”: Ethics on the Internet Rachel always appreciates those who have their own opinion about things. She feels free to post what she wants “but there are certain things I would never do, such as posting nude scenes on the Internet, or an 83 Paulo Guimarães & Maria Inês de C. Delorme ofensive video about someone; I would never curse anyone. I would never be a hacker, ever. “ We point out that her concern about what should and should not be shared online can be regarded as a nuance of what we understand as “quality on the Internet”, since she seeks a relationship of legitimacy with what she considers not only relevant, but also simultaneously correct, to share on the network. On this point, it is worth underlining the complexity of building this kind of “digital regulation”8 and the dimension of this issue in media, in contemporaneity. I produce and post because... Rachel posts videos aiming “to teach everyone what a good channel is. To amuse people and for me, too, to have fun”. She hopes to meet the expectations of her fans, become known, and get more and more fans. “he more people watching me, the better. I don’t think there are a million people giving “likes”; I imagine there are a million people following me because they like me, they understand me, they recognize themselves in me and that’s good”. She does not know how her life will be in the future, but would like to be an actress, working with art – always away from mathematics. She likes to perform, cook sweets and decorate cakes (she talks about becoming a cake maker), and stresses that she “thinks about studying to be an actress someday.” Image 4. Opening photo of the “RAK Cooks” video 84 The YouTube Channel RAK TV At the same time, she does not hide her desire to be identiied on the streets and to have social visibility as a YouTuber, claiming: “making money is always good, but that’s not exactly what I seek as a YouTuber”. his happens to most creative people, “but it’s not the hope of getting fame or fortune that guides them; rather, it’s the opportunity to do a job they like” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1996, p. 107). In this ield, we still need to establish a discussion about “succeeding and being a celebrity”, since this relection was identiied in Rachel’s comments and indeed those of all the young people we spoke with. One of the essential reasons for producing and sharing content is a desire for recognition by their peers, viewers, friends, fans, and everyone who interacts with their productions. herefore, despite her worries about the quality of what she produces and conveys, she likes to assume that her products can have an even greater reach. She does not produce to meet the interests of whoever her audience is. In fact, she produces to be happy, to be as she is, and to expose her thoughts in order to legitimize herself as a fun YouTuber who “has her own opinions, without there necessarily being a goal to attain”. Her speeches are vehement and coherent, and her videos conirm what Jorge (2012) points out: “he power of celebrities has a discursive root. In fact, contemporary celebrities are built in the interaction and circulation by the media” (p. 79). In a consecutive way, it is possible to say that the construction of this kind of relation between “one who does/says/indicates/” and “one who assists/consumes/enjoys/” is also cyclical, as it suggests its growth and expansion in the light of complicity between these two parties. In addition, it can be said that the potential presented by media and its scope suggests the need for a more in-depth investigation of the role of leadership and power relations in this universe. It is also necessary to relect on the fact that “youth cultures are thus very marked precisely by the connection to the media culture, the cultural and entertainment industries in complex ways of which celebrities are an essential part” (ibid, p. 120). In relation to the YouTuber videos, they address issues in Rachel’s life that are important to her and that stress her identity (it is not only her audio, but also she herself who acts and talks to the audience), among other factors that narrow the relationship between her and her 85 Paulo Guimarães & Maria Inês de C. Delorme public. his implies that if on the one hand there is a desire to promote a legitimate approach between her, as a celebrity, and her fans, on the other hand there is a concern about the clear construction of limits that she plainly establishes and shapes. It can be said that Rachel’s speeches, in relation to studies on celebrities, allow us to consider that “the credibility of a celebrity between his/her public and professional life, on the one hand, and personal and private, on the other, is fundamental for activation and reiteration of cultural visibility and the efective functioning of the endorsement, whether political or commercial” (ibid p. 94, 95). However, such a nuance becomes much more sensitive in the sphere of YouTubers who still have a small number of productions and some level of control over their audience – compared to the examples ofered by the interviewee herself – mainly due to her non-professionalization in the area of production and placement of videos. herefore, to conclude, it can be said that Rachel is aware, and takes care to ensure that her life as a YouTuber does not mix with her personal life in issues related mainly to her safety and integrity. In addition, on this dichotomy between public and private life, she concludes: “Yes, I would like to be a celebrity, to be recognized on the street; but without exaggeration, without persecution like what happened to John Lennon, who was killed by a fan”. Notes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. RAK TV channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCr083JAJfAsYhtDz589ltjQ “Tag: Twin Sister” video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwxW2OSa14Y he Musical.Ly app: www.musical.ly . Available for download and video creation and sharing. Ater de Eleven o’clock channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/depoisdas11 Instagram of Taciele Alcolea: https://www.instagram.com/tacielealcolea/?hl=pt-br and her Snapchat:@Tacialcolea Instagram haynara OG: https://www.instagram.com/thainaraog/?hl=pt-br and her Snapchat:@thaynaraog Paulo Sergio de Jesus Guimarães, Master in Education and Specialization in Digital Technologies, Institute of Education and Digital Technologies, University of Lisbon, Portugal, paulo.guimaraes@campus.ul.pt Maria Inês de C. Delorme, PhD, PostDoc, Professor, Department of Childhood Studies, University of the State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, delormenic@gmail.com 86 The YouTube Channel RAK TV 7. 8. Kéfera Buchmann de Mattos Johnson Pereira (Curitiba, January 25, 1993), better known as simply Kéfera, is a Brazilian actress, vlogger, voice actress, presenter, and writer. She became better known through the YouTube channel “5ive Minutes”, one of the irst channels in Brazil to reach a million subscribers. In 2016 she was named by Forbes magazine as one of the most promising young women in Brazil. Her channel can be accessed at the following address: https://www.youtube.com/ user/5iveminutes Law 12.965/14, known as the “Civil Internet Framework”, addresses issues related to the responsibility and attribution of rights and duties related to the use of the Internet in national territory. Available at: http://culturadigital.br/marcocivil/ References Csikszentmihalyi, Mihalyi (1996). Creativity. New York: Harper Collins. Delorme, Maria Ines C. (2008) Domingo é dia de felicidade. Rio de Janeiro: Ed. Multifoco. Guimaraes, Paulo (2016). Mobile technologies in education: Processes and developing solutions for the learning space design. University of Lisbon. Master’s dissertation. Jenkins, Henry (2009). Culture of Convergence (2nd Ed). São Paulo: Aleph. Jorge, Ana (2012). he Culture of Celebrities and Youth: from consumption to participation. University of Lisbon. PhD inal thesis. 87 Expressions of Creativity among Children and Youth In diferent parts of the world we ind diferent cultural expressions through media. he widely spread access to Internet and digital media makes it possible to share and experience this, learn from each other, get new impulses and ind inspiration for new creations. his section provides some examples. 7 “Exclusively for Keitai” Literary Creativity of Japanese Media Youths Kyounghwa Yonnie Kim obile technology and wireless Internet were adopted early in Japan and created a unique opportunity for Japanese people to experience ubiquitous networking from the late 1990s. he role of Japan as a powerful test-bed for mobile technology has been acknowledged (Rheingold, 2002; Ito et al. 2005; Tomita, 2016), suggesting the presence of a unique cultural milieu of mobile media use in the region. he term keitai (the Japanese word for mobile phone, literally meaning ‘portable’ or ‘carry-with’) has been being favorably used by cultural scholars as a way to emphasize the unique context of the mobile technologies in Japanese everyday lives. While the interest in cultural contexts occasionally leads to the exaggeration of its Japaneseness, it may be important to note that the rise of keitai culture is to be understood as a part of the global mobile society (Castells et al. 2007) keitai culture should be explored as a way to disclose the socio-cultural dynamism of the everyday practices in diferent contexts such as generations, genders, locations, economic situation, etc., rather than focusing on its use tendency. M Keitai shôsetsu and young creators in Japan Despite continuing anxieties and widespread skepticism surrounding excessive use of mobile media among youths (Matsuda, 2010), the activeness of the young generation in the formation of keitai culture has been prominent in Japan. For instance, Tomita et al. (1997) paid at91 Kim, Kyounghwa Yonnie (2017). “Exclusively for Keitai”. Literary Creativity of Japanese Media Youths in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Kyounghwa Yonnie Kim tention to the youths’ entertaining and creative interpretation of pagers (a nascent mobile medium capable only of sending a call signal) in the mid-1990s as a social background to generate a desire for new types of peer communication through the mobile network. More recently, it seems obvious that young users’ overwhelming preference for mobile social media such as Twitter, Facebook and LINE1 has been creating a new trend for social networking and digital culture. It is undeniable that Japanese youths have played a crucial role as a cultural pathinder of new media at every turning point, taking the lead in repositioning new technology into one’s everyday life. In this article, I put the spotlight on a phenomenon called keitai shôsetsu, a form of user-created literature written and read exclusively on the mobile platform, in order to demonstrate young females’ role in initiating mobile literary creativity in Japan. Similar to other interactive literature, the keitai shôsetsu (as shôsetsu means “novel”, keitai shôsetsu literally means “mobile novel” or “portable novel”) is usually written by voluntary amateur writers, shared on a specialized website, and read by audiences as it is being created. It has been particularly popular among young females, explaining its feminine tastes in plots such as love stories, sot school iction, and romantic science iction. One of the key characteristics of keitai shôsetsu is that its writing and reading practices take place on mobile media at the individual’s own convenience, to explain its unique naming. It got its start in 2000, when Maho-No-Airando, an online community service provider, launched a keitai-specialized blog platform featuring a “story writing” channel. It may be noteworthy that this was far before the global rise of the smartphone, while in other regions wireless Internet service did not exist or, if it did, was struggling to attract consumers. In spite of the increasing popularity of this new channel, keitai shôsetsu was hardly noticed by the mass media until the commercial success of the work titled Koizora (Love Sky) in 2005. he story, originally created and uploaded by the amateur writer Mika, gained popularity on Maho No Airando’s website, and was transformed into a printed book to phenomenal success. Its commercial breakthrough is partly related to its distributional structure, in that the interactive authorship of keitai shôsetsu oten brings forth loyal readers who are willing to not only subscribe in cyberspace, but also purchase a paper 92 “Exclusively for Keitai” book due to a desire to own it as a physical medium. he content sold more than a million copies as a printed book, and was reproduced in other media forms such as manga, TV drama, and a movie, yielding impressive results here as well. Eventually, the social achievement of Koizora brought to the forefront the fact that millions of young female users were actively participating in media production and consumption in cyberspace. It was also remarkable that the creativity and marketing power of this phenomenon were entirely grounded in mobile media. he success of this Internet-originated interactive literature was not the irst case. For instance, a few years before the rise of Koizora, an Internet-oriented story titled Densha Otoko (Train Boy) — an interactive literature work originally uploaded to 2ch (ni-channeru), a well-known anonymous BBS2 forum in Japan — enjoyed great success through multimedia marketing, appearing as a printed book, manga, a movie, TV drama, and a play. he story features an introverted otaku (technology geek) seeking a way to ask a gorgeous girl to go out with him, presenting the typical male tastes in cyberspace. he image of otaku certainly stereotypes an introvert and unstylish male who reversely becomes active and aggressive in the anonymous cyberspace. In fact, there is a irmly rooted dichotomous thinking in Japan that, while males are loyal and active users of new technology, females are less enthusiastic and are thus slow to adopt new devices. As a creative force on the online platform, women had been regarded as lagging behind technological trends, unless they were related to the so-called feminine genres such as fashion and cosmetics. However, the phenomenal success of keitai shôsetsu worked as counter-evidence of this prejudice, to prove the power of females as a creative drive and savvy consumers of new technology. Hjorth (2009) accurately noted that the mobile platform has provided a niche for Japanese female users to exert their creativity to relect their own tastes. Meanwhile, keitai shôsetsu found itself the subject of social criticism and public anxiety. Because its story oten deals with such sensational issues as teenage sex, group bullying in school, rape, teen pregnancy, and abortion, it cannot escape the denunciation of lacking reality in the Japanese teen’s context. he writing style of keitai shôsetsu also became the target of severe criticism, as the stories tend to contain grammatically incorrect or misspelled words. While the young amateur writers of 93 Kyounghwa Yonnie Kim Image 1. Maho No Airando is actively running its keitai shôsetsu channel. Accessed December 2, 2016. keitai shôsetsu oten use unskilled and juvenile expressions, the frequent grammatical errors are partly due to its colloquial writing styles, oten centered on a series of conversations or short expressions for readers’ emotional immersion and enjoyment. Because of the combination of unrealistic story composition and poor expression, professional writers and critics alike despised keitai shôsetsu as a sort of “false literature”, supported only by immature youngsters. In the atermath of the runaway success of Koizora, only a handful of the keitai shôsetsu sold well in paper book form, and the amount of social attention paid to keitai shôsetsu has declined amidst sluggish sales. When the website Maho-No-Airando, the largest keitai shôsetsu distributor, was sold to a giant publishing company in 2011, social discourses started mentioning keitai shôsetsu as a transient phenomenon that had run its course. Although the phenomenon itself disappeared from public attention, a survey released in 20113 showed that the reading public of keitai shôsetsu is growing in line with the increase in smartphone use. Furthermore, dozens of commercial keitai shôsetsu websites are still operating with a proitable business model, transforming interactive literature into printed books for sale (Figure 1). In other words, keitai shôsetsu succeeded in making inroads into the privileged position of Japanese literary circles, to prove the emergence of new creativity on the mobile platform by young generations. Exclusively for keitai: From insiders’ voices As keitai shôsetsu involves a wide range of literary communication, such as reading, writing, or sharing comments on mobile phones, one key question is how to approach literary creativity on the most up-to94 “Exclusively for Keitai” date technological platform. his has hitherto been a relatively ignored issue, overwhelmed by discourses on the novelty of mobile technology as well as the strong stereotype of traditional literature. In this regard, in my ethnographic research on authors and loyal readers of keitai shôsetsu in urban areas of Japan since 2009 (Kim, 2012), I focused more on a subjective and voluntary aspect of their creativity rather than an objective and social interpretation of mobile media and literature itself. Although the speciic circumstances of experiences difer from person to person, in many cases the presence of keitai seemed an overwhelming and critical element of “doing keitai shôsetsu”. he majority of keitai shôsetsu consumers exclusively chose mobile media as their favorite platform for both writing and reading. In fact, most consumers opposed the argument that they were forced to read the literature on their mobile platforms because they had no access to other media, such as a PC. Many instead insisted that the mobile media was the best interface for maximizing their enjoyment, and that other media would not allow them to savor the content to its full extent: I’ve read the same keitai shôsetsu on both the keitai and PC since I liked the story very much. I even read it in paperback form. But only reading on keitai moved me to tears. Keitai shôsetsu has its own expression, one that’s best delivered through keitai. [S, female, 21, college student] his can be understood in relation to the material characteristics of the dominant keitai models in Japan at the time, which were mostly the lip-close types with vertically rectangular and smaller screens (compared to those of early smartphone models). As most keitai shôsetsu websites provided a best-viewed interface for these domestic models, the genre’s production required not only the plotting of a story, but also an integration and interspersion of expressions painstakingly tailored for, or highly restricted by, the mobile interface of keitai (Figure 2). An author of keitai shôsetsu explained that: he story and characters are of course very important, but it’s also critical to imagine what it will look like on keitai screens when you write a story. For example, I’m paying the closest attention to the line spacing of the text. I enter some blank lines intentionally when I want readers to take a few minutes to scroll down before going to 95 Kyounghwa Yonnie Kim Image 2. The reading and writing of keitai shôsetsu was most favorably performed with the dominant models in Japan at the time. Photographed in June, 2009. the next sentence. hat way, I can control how they dwell on the emotions of characters. [Y, female, 23, oice worker] Some authors tried to maintain a more strategic attitude, saying they even paid close attention to managing technological conditions so as to reach more readers and make them stick to their stories. As one respondent stated: I pay particular attention to what time I should update new content. I usually post a new text during the day. I know some readers set a notice function so that they’ll be immediately notiied that new content has been posted. Once I put up a new text late at night, when everyone was in all likelihood sleeping, and not many people accessed this new content the next day. [T, female, 21, college student] As a form of creative practice, keitai shôsetsu is not a simple presentation of ictional literature but rather an integrated expression exclusively designed for the material characteristics of mobile media. his raises the possibility that the phenomenon might be situated and better described within the framework of creative afordance to mobile media, rather than general discourses on interactive literature and digital content. While the material conditions of the interface of mobile media seemed to be a crucial aspect for keitai shôsetsu enthusiasts, their choices were not only based on functional and practical reasons but were also 96 “Exclusively for Keitai” underpinned by the commitment to the speciic environment of using mobile media. Many interviewees stated that their reading experiences tended to exclusively take place at a designated time and place. For example, a respondent described her emotional encounter with keitai shôsetsu as follows: I started reading keitai shôsetsu because I was sufering from insomnia. I had trouble falling asleep so I wanted to make my eyes tired by reading something before sleeping. My irst keitai shôsetsu was Koizora; it was a hot topic then. I actually stayed up all night so I could inish it. he story was so touching that I cried all night. From that point on I was totally hooked on keitai shôsetsu. I read them almost every night; that is, as long as I’m not so tired that I have to zonk out. It’s ironic that it has now become another obstacle to sleep. [S, female, 20, college student] his case is not at all extraordinary, as a signiicant number of respondents identiied “in bed before sleeping” as the ideal situation for reading keitai shôsetsu. Playing with one’s mobile media in bed before sleeping was a widespread practice among youngsters, being a place they experienced complete privacy and were the most likely to be able to relax (Figure 3). Afective attachment and mobile intimacy seemed to serve as another pivot for creative activity, as many respondents mentioned their emotional moments and intimate sensitivity in writing and reading Image 3. Keitai shôsetsu oten delivers intimate and emotional messages, sometimes with erotic fantasy, suggesting readers’ taste of reading alone before sleeping. 97 Kyounghwa Yonnie Kim stories. A signiicant number of respondents related the experience of writing and reading keitai shôsetsu to that of exchanging keitai emails with close friends. hey claimed that keitai shôsetsu was by no means a new or fresh experience, as they were already accustomed to keitai emails: Keitai shôsetsu are more akin to personal messages than serious literature. I became accustomed to keitai shôsetsu so quickly, because it doesn’t feel that new. [Y, female, 26, oice worker] From the standpoint of how insiders actually understand and translate this phenomenon, cultural patterns of keitai shôsetsu – namely, how to coordinate writing, reading, and commenting on the literature on mobile broadband – should be positioned as the “remediation” (Bolter & Grusin, 1999) of email rather than literature. By exploring the insider’s voice around keitai shôsetsu, we can begin to understand the technological context of young creators in Japan, as well as the emotional and intimate texture of creative labors with mobile media. Literary creativity and a historical link he preference for literary communication in Japanese mobile media use was reported in a recent survey in Japan (Matsuda et al., 2014), showing email (88%) rather than voice calls to be the preferred feature of mobile media as a communication tool. According to the results, this tendency was even prominent among the younger demographic and female users, suggesting that this most up-to-date technology is deliberately devoted to old-fashioned communications; that is, writing and reading rather than richer visual expression. he prosperity of literary expression and diverse creativity might be one of the distinct characteristics of Japanese cyberspace, especially when the early adaptation of wireless Internet with low bandwidth encouraged users to develop mobile communication strategies whereby one consumed less network capacity but could convey rich contexts. Certainly, keitai shôsetsu, as an emerging type of literary creativity, can be understood as an inheritor of this tendency. Furthermore, as a creative use of a new device (keitai) within a contemporary social context (urban environment), the practical prototype of keitai shôsetsu can be found the early stage of postal media in Japan 98 “Exclusively for Keitai” during the Meiji era (Kim, 2014). Today, postal media, such as a letter or a postcard, may be suitably understood as parts of social system rather than as communication technology. However, in the early era of the postal system, sending and receiving a postal medium across geographical spaces was a novel way to create feelings of telepresence (Milne, 2010). When postcards irst emerged as a medium for this new attraction, ordinary people used them to write short ictional stories, called hagaki-shôsetsu (hagaki means “postcard”; thus, “postcard novel”). It is not diicult to ind the similarity between keitai shôsetsu and hagaki-shôsetsu, in the link of both the literary genre and the new medium of the day. It is interesting to note that, in other countries such as Mainland China and South Korea, there were attempts to build online mobile novel platforms, mainly prompted by the mega-hit of Koizora in Japan. However, neither of these countries achieved recognizable success. In this sense, keitai shôsetsu certainly provides a concrete example of the social appropriation and cultural customization of mobile technologies in Japan, revealing how new technology (mobile media) resonates with existing cultural prototypes (literature) to generate new creativity. Conclusion: Mobile media as a creative platform This article has sought to delineate keitai shôsetsu as an emerging creativity by the Japanese younger generation, by looking into a cultural mechanism that allows to build and handle their creativity in everyday experiences with mobile media. While keitai shôsetsu shares many of the cultural displays of interactive literature in cyberspace, this phenomenon cannot be fully understood without the consideration of keitai as a medium, or the gendered socio-historical context of Japanese society. In terms of the refashioning of email rather than literature, keitai shôsetsu is rather a cultural practice for relocating mobile media into one’s everyday experiences, revealing its possibility as a new creative platform. Many aspects of mobile media have been praised; however, the focus has been on its technological novelty and social role as a communication tool. With the convincing case of keitai shôsetsu, we can begin to understand how creative dynamism has been deployed around mobile media, and how new creativity is being evolved and modiied by an 99 Kyounghwa Yonnie Kim outsider group: young Japanese females. We need to understand this emerging issue surrounding new media in youngsters’ creative activism in cyberspace, and to grasp diverse cultural moments in the midst of everyday practices. his new form of creativity revealed tensions between social innovation and harmful efect, both old and new, and in diferent social groups. he question of mobile media as a creative tool for both society and individuals could be a starting point in relecting its path as a socio-cultural artefact. Notes 1. 2. 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_(sotware) BBS is an acronym for Bulletin Board System, commonly used in Japan to describe an online content platform mainly for reading and writing. http://internetcom.jp/research/20110708/1.html References Bolter, Jay David & Grusin, Richard (1999). Remediation: Understanding new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Castells, Manuel, Ferdandez-Ardevol, Mireia; Qiu, Jack Linchuan; & Sey, Araba (2007). Mobile communication and society: A global perspective. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Hjorth, Larissa (2009). Mobile media in the Asia-Paciic: Gender and the art of being mobile. London and New York: Routledge. Ito, Mizuko; Okabe, Daisuke & Matsuda, M. (eds.) (2005). Personal, portable, pedestrian: Mobile phones in Japanese life. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Kim, Kyounghwa Yonnie (2012). “he landscape of keitai shôsetsu: Mobile phones as a literary medium among Japanese youth”. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 26(3):475-485. Kim, Kyounghwa Yonnie (2014). “Genealogy of mobile creativity: A media archaeological approach to literary practice in Japan”, pp. 216-224 in Goggin, Gerard & Hjorth, Larissa (eds.) he Routledge companion to mobile media. London: Routledge. Kim, Kyounghwa Yonnie (2017 forthcoming). “Keitai in Japan” in Darling-Wolf, Fabienne (ed.) Routledge handbook of Japanese media. New York: Routledge. Matsuda, Misa (2010). “Japanese mobile youth in the 2000s”, pp. 31-42 in Donald, Stephanie Hemelryk; Anderson, heresa Dirndorfer & Spry, Damien (eds.) Youth, society and mobile media in Asia. New York: Routledge. Matsuda, Misa; Dobashi, Shingo & Tsuji, Izumi (eds.) (2014). Keitai no 2000-nendai: Seijuku suru Mobairu Shakai [Keitai in the 2000s: Maturation of Japanese mobile society]. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press. Milne, Esther (2010). Letters, Postcards, Email: Technologies of Presence. London: Routledge. Kyounghwa Yonnie Kim, Assistant Professor, Department of International Communication, Kanda University of International Studies, Japan, kim-ky@kanda.kuis.ac.jp 100 “Exclusively for Keitai” Okada, Tomoyuki (2005). “Youth culture and the shaping of Japanese mobile media: Personalization and the keitai Internet as multimedia”, pp. 41-60 in Ito, Mizuko; Okabe, Daiske & Matsuda, Misa (eds.) Personal, portable, pedestrian: Mobile phones in Japanese life. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Rheingold, Howard (2002). Smart mobs: he next social revolution. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing. Tomita, Hidenori; Fujimoto, Kenichi; Okada, Tomoyuki; Matsuda, Misa & Takahiro, Norihiko (1997). Pokeberu-Keitai shugi [Pocket bell & Keitai-ism]. Tokyo: JustSystem. Tomita, Hidenori (ed.) (2016). he post-mobile society: From the smart/mobile to second oline. London and New York: Routledge. 101 8 A Shared Literary Experience Youth Reading, Creativity and Virtual Performances Alejandra Ravettino Destefanis W ith the consumption of young adult (YA) literature by young adults position in git within the novelties of the publishing world, we must consider that this phenomenon is associated with other practices involving young people. In this regard, we need to recognize that an important part of this literature’s success coincides with the emergence of spaces on the Web where young people around the globe write and create videos to give their opinion on recent releases. YA literature also has its own broadcasting means, redesigned from traditional marketing strategies. Books for young people circulate on virtual spaces which spread literary novelties: literary blogs, YouTube channels dedicated to recommending new book releases, communities, closed Facebook groups, and other social media like Twitter and Instagram. For some years, on the YouTube platform, a group of book lovers have been occupying a space; they are what are known as booktubers, and they present and review books for young people to their peers. So, who are these booktubers? hey constitute a virtual global community which shares the pleasure of reading ictional works. hey record videos, discussing literature and the actions related to the book: from the desires and expectations around a new release, to ways of acquiring, collecting and storing books. hey complain about the lack of money, time and space, poor editions, and the excess of novelties. hey feel conident enough to recommend books or 103 Ravettino Destefanis, Alejandra (2017) A Shared Literary Experience. Youth Reading, Creativity and Virtual Performances in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Alejandra Ravettino Destefanis authors. hey do not follow professional critics or specialist opinions. Besides reviewing the books, they show their personal libraries and ofer recommendations as to how future booktubers should become initiated in booktubing. Like the age group targeted by YA literature, this is a large social collective which brings together adolescents and young people – both male and female– aged between 11 and 30 years; and although the booktuber phenomenon is originally an Anglo-Saxon movement it has moved to diferent territories, irmly taking root in Spain, Mexico, Colombia and Argentina. In Argentina in particular, the Feria del Libro (book fair) presents a novelty every year, and each edition increasingly targets young readers. In fact, for its 42nd edition, the Feria hosted the First International Booktuber Meeting, with participating young readers from Chile, Peru, Colombia, Argentina and other Spanish-speaking countries.1 Other activities that are gathering supporters among the younger public, compatible with the YouTube platform, are booktalks (debates about books involving diferent readers) and book hauls (presentations of new publications and the most recent purchases made by booktubers themselves). Literature consumption by youngsters In recent years, the literature choice for the younger audience has undergone a marked transformation. Simultaneously with classic authors –Charlotte Brontë (1847), Jane Austen (1813), Mark Twain (1876), Jules Verne (1865) and Daniel Defoe (1719), to mention only a few– a new wave of dystopian, romantic, fantastic and mythological works has emerged. his type of literature, which is experiencing huge growth in terms of publication numbers, is referred to as YA (Young Adult), a term coined by the media and the readers themselves.2 For their part, publishers, aware of how this growth drives the production of the book market, tend to have a label or a specialist in youth literature with which they release at least one or two copies per month.3 What subject do they tackle? hese ictional works nearly always have adolescents or young people as the protagonists and are presented in the saga format, thus ensuring continuity in the story. he stories tend to portray interpersonal relations –friendship, companionship, 104 A Shared Literary Experience sentimental relationships– in a “positive light”, and some even address more complex themes like illness, bullying, unwanted pregnancy and sexual abuse.4 Which youth literature classics, if published today for the first time, would it into YA literature? Possibly he Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger (1951), Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen (1813), To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee (1960), he Outsiders by Susan Hinton (1967), or Lord of the Flies by William Golding (1954). Who are the readers? From the age of 12, young people consume these books, and although some believe the upper limit of the age range is 17 –given the subjects discussed, the characters and the narrative core– many adults also enjoy the books. In particular, in a study conducted among young Argentinians aged over18 years old, a large proportion of those surveyed had recently read titles within this genre (Ravettino Destefanis, 2016). It is a niche market made up of a loyal and socially active audience, keen to discover new experiences. Evidently, these YA book readers constitute a coveted group in the publishing industry. According to a study by Bowler (2012), these young people are:“the irst to adopt”, for example e-book reading; “committed”, since if the book they are seeking is not available in electronic format they buy it in print; “loyal”, because they tend to read a favourite author’s previous books; and “socially active”, as although more than half of those surveyed admitted to not taking part in a reading group, they are active on social networks and oten receive recommendations from friends.5 Some believe that it is suicient to regard literature as a creative reading ofer; that it is an art form without adjectives. hat is to say that there is no need, except for the commercial aspect, to categorize it into an age group. Although literature aimed at younger readers has its idiosyncratic marks, “literature” is a whole, and this young group should not need reading material marked by a transition from childhood to adulthood. Two factors deine the YA genre. One is the commercial aspect seeking to renew its image and stop being labelled “juvenile”, which is deemed antiquated, to announce a novelty in the market which ofers something diferent. he other deining factor of YA literature is the need to segment a group of young readers, 18-year-olds and over, to a 105 Alejandra Ravettino Destefanis product deined by the themes of love, sex and suspense in romantic novels, epic sagas and vampirism (Perriconi, 2015). What success do these books have? To answer this question, the scope of young people’s expectations should be broadened to a space where images, hopes, wishes and experiences converge; in essence, we must decipher young people’s imaginary world. Reconstructing the act of reading implies understanding how each community has genre classiication systems which diferentiate between iction and truth, but also between the metaphorical and ironic discourse (Chartier, 1999); an imaginary group which works on plots, themes and characters, and simultaneously constitutes them. Booktubers as acting readers Can booktubers be considered “acting readers”? Yes, insofar as they interpret their reading: they enthusiastically prepare their performances, resorting to words, gestures, images and sounds. hey construct eloquent stories. heir representations have become more sophisticated over time, as one can tell by looking at their trajectory, seeing how they have bettered themselves in terms of creativity and efort. hey have turned their practice into a trade, and in some cases their eforts yield results every month. heir progress is greatly owed to their charisma, ingenuity, wit and histrionics. Several of these young people read the book they recommend in its original language; reading in both English and Spanish allows them to ofer even more sophisticated literary critiques. hey create stories from the ones they read. hey turn a book into an audio-visual performance. Nevertheless, in their representations, a personal style emerges that ends up resembling someone else’s style. Booktubers share their similar tastes for literature, but also share the style they use to represent their critiques: looking at the performances alone, one will notice that although they are original, the style is shared throughout the community.6 he multiplicity of virtual resources to which they have access means that their confessional practices rapidly spread and become well-known on the Web. As a sociological phenomenon, we need to consider how young people, by becoming involved in the sphere of digital communication, make the digitalized social context the centre of their life experience. As a result, a new youth identity appears, constituted by the 106 A Shared Literary Experience pleasure of reading and the virtual community experience. In short, new ways of being and acting in the world of young people emerge as a result of the literary and cultural consumption that is shared and broadcasted. he previously set ways of communicating reading material have changed. We could go so far as to state that booktubers operate as real reading facilitators. Likewise, they have opened a direct communication channel between writers, publishers and readers. As such, the dynamic imposed by these active readers has enabled publishers to approach them with a sales strategy for their books, leaving the traditional broadcasting channels to the side and teaming up with these young readers, sending them copies to review and inviting them to speciic literary events such as book presentations and signings. Another contemporary example uniting readers and producers is the faniction phenomenon. For example, fans of the Twilight series wrote a blog which gave rise to Fity Shades of Grey by E.L. James7 –which young people from the survey themselves mentioned having read, but to a lesser extent (Ravettino Destefanis, 2016). Another contemporary practice which gives an account of the alliance between young readers and publishers is the recent initiative by the producers of the Twilight saga to encourage the spread of stories in order to continue it.8 Could this modus operandi not be considered the modern version of the participation of 18th-century novel readers who sent letters to authors? Even the blog novel phenomenon, which has already been in the virtual literary circle for several years, is characterized by the active –and at times, collaborative– participation of its readers and by the immediacy between the writing and the publication as it is made up of releases. In this regard, if until the 20thcentury, newspapers were a irst step towards the publishing of novels in a book format, from the 21st century onwards, Internet publications could be fulilling that same role.9In short, readers’ participation in the creative process and the periodic release of literature appear to go back a long time. New information and communication technologies favour the emergence of the autobiographical story of the booktuber. Since the very start, the media have modiied the way in which information circulates, demanding a redeinition of the discursivity and the appropriation of contents. While in the past, newspapers, radio and television provided 107 Alejandra Ravettino Destefanis a space for the reinterpretation of old discourses and reports, today it is the Internet which has that role. In the same way that a self-report –the creation of the I reader– emerges in the booktubers’ performances, an interpretative community (De Certeau, 1996) appears, which keeps a reduced space for traditional individual and silent reading, and revolves more around participative and collaborative reading. In this regard, digital technology does not only refer to the novelty of mobile devices and appliances, but also to new ways of perceiving and of language, to new sensitivities and writing which gradually alter the experience of reading (Martin Barbero 2005). In short, the booktuber phenomenon embodies the willingness to create a community that is looking for common attributes with other users/readers, to establish a conversational dynamic and present the act of reading as a fundamental social act of its own accord. hat is to say, the identity-related axis in the self-report discourse is produced in the performative practice itself and in the creation of bonds which generate common, virtual and global narratives whereby books and reading operate as a connection with “the other”. Notes 1. 2. 3. he cultural eventgeared towards adolescent readers (which brought together booktubers, bloggers and bookstagrammers) was boosted by the international presence of young writers for several days at the fair. <http://www.el-libro.org.ar/ internacional/propuestas-culturales> [Accessed 31 January 2016]. Literature for Young Adults, abbreviated as YA or Ya-Lit, is gaining knowledge all over the world and can be deined as literature for young people (12 to 17 years old), despite having many readers from other age groups (over 18 years). It separates itself from children’s literature by leaving aside the ingenuity of the protagonists and concentrating on more adult themes. According to the publishing company V&REditoras, James Dashner, author of the he Maze Runner series, had sold 6,500,000 copies worldwide by last year. he irst two books of the trilogy already have a ilm version, and the adaptation of the next book into a ilm is underway. he best-selling saga-ilm version dynamic is being repeated in other YA titles around the world, for instance Twilight, he Hunger Games and he 5th Wave. For its part, Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone by J. K. Rowling, irst published nearly 20 years ago, set the standard for this new youth trend. SOURCE: Oliva, Lorena. (2016). Literatura Young Adults: ¿negocio o pasión por leer? La Nación, 08 mayo 2016 [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/ lxwTrO>. [Accessed 31 January 2016]. Alejandra Ravettino Destefanis, Ph.D. in Social Sciences, University of Buenos Aires, Argentina, a-rades@live.com.ar 108 A Shared Literary Experience 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Oliva, Lorena. (2016). Literatura Young Adults: ¿negocio o pasiónpor leer? La Nación, 08 May 2016 [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/lxwTrO>. [Accessed 31 January 2016]. Bowker Market Research. (2012). Young Adult Books Attract Growing Numbers of Adult Fans. Bowker, 13 September 2012 [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/ NUglmH>. [Accessed 31 January 2016]. As an example of renowned booktubers and pioneers in the trade, we can mention Christine from PolandBananasBooks, with over a hundred thousand followers, and JesseheReader, who has exceeded 50thousand subscribers. At the following link, a blogger recommends Argentinian booktubers <http://goo.gl/aeOcNG>. [Accessed 31 January 2016]. he idea came about between 2009 and 2011 as a faniction piece written by Twilight followers, one of whom was E.L. James. Access to these texts was free and could be gained through faniction.net. he British writer, who based her story on the protagonists of Meyer’s novel, shared the chapters she wrote, which eventually became the trilogy Fity Shades of Grey. At the beginning, the compendium of chapters was called Master of the Universe, until the publisher acquired the publishing rights and the stories were removed from the Web. Eventually, both author and publisher decided to readapt the original texts and remove any references to the Twilight saga. SOURCE: Melty (2013). Cincuenta sombras de Grey: 5 cosas que deberías saber. Melty.es, 14 April 2013 [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/QP4C6a>. [Accessed 31 January 2016]. Stephenie Meyer, the author of Twilight, and Lionsgate Entertainment, the production company in charge of its cinematographic adaptation, reached an agreement with Facebook that during 2015, the social network would release ive short ilms. hrough the competition “he Storytellers: New Creative Voices of he Twilight Saga”, ive directors would be chosen to write the new stories. he winners were selected by public vote as well as a panel of experts –made up exclusively of women– including the writer herself, actresses Kate Winslet, Julie Bowen and Octavia Spencer, the protagonist and the president of the association Women In Film, Cathy Schulman. SOURCE: Bishop, Brian. (2014). New ‘Twilight’ Short Films Are Coming to Facebook. he Hollywood Reporter, 30 September 2014 [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/y9lTpp>. [Accessed 31 January 2016]. Furthermore, the blognovel has a format in which the posts replace what was initially organized into chapters. Both saga and blognovel readers can access the text through any release and can therefore “pick up the already commenced novel”; this is why each of the releases is updated with the progression of the story, which characters are acting at the time, and what has happened in the immediate past. he diference between the saga and the blognovel lies in how it is updated. While the saga presents an analysis summary of the facts and descriptions of the characters, blognovels provide this information through hyperlinks on the names of the characters (Ravettino Destefanis 2011). References Austen, Jane (1813). Pride and Prejudice. [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/khBi>. [Accessed 05 February 2016]. Barnes & Noble (2015). he Best Young Adults Books of 2015, Barnes & Noble, 03 December 2015 [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/ar4smu>. [Accessed 31 January 2016]. 109 Alejandra Ravettino Destefanis Bishop, Brian (2014). New ‘Twilight’ Short Films Are Coming to Facebook. he Hollywood Reporter, 30 September 2014 [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/y9lTpp>. [Accessed 31 January 2016]. Brontë, Charlotte (1847). Jane Eyne. [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/N3T7Ln>. [Accessed 05 February 2016]. Bowker Market Research (2012). Young Adult Books Attract Growing Numbers of Adult Fans. Bowker, 13 September 2012 [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/NUglmH>. [Accessed 31 January 2016]. Chartier, Roger (1999). Cultura escrita, literatura e historia. México: Fondo de la Cultura Económica. De Certeau, Michel (1996). La Invención de lo Cotidiano I. Artes de Hacer. México: Universidad Iberoamericana. Defoe, Daniel (1719). Robinson Crusoe. [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/6RPCnh>. [Accessed 05 February 2016]. Golding, William (1954). Lord of the Flies. [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/BuW4dj>. [Accessed 05 February 2016]. Hinton, Susan (1967). he Outsiders.[online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/7XkDTs>. [Accessed 05 February 2016]. Lee, Harper (1960). To Kill a Mockingbird. [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/qmNrGM>. [Accessed 05 February 2016]. Martín-Barbero, Jesús (2005). “Los modos de leer”. Presentado en la semana de la lectura CERLALC en el panel “Lectura y medios de comunicación”. Bogotá: Centro de Competencia en Comunicación para América Latina. Melty (2013). Cincuenta sombras de Grey: 5 cosas que deberías saber. Melty.es, 14 April 2013 [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/QP4C6a>. [Accessed 31 January 2016]. Perriconi, Graciela (2015). La construcción del géneroen la literaturainfantil y juvenil. Buenos Aires: Editorial Lugar. Oliva, Lorena (2016). Literatura Young Adults: ¿negocio o pasiónpor leer? La Nación, 08 mayo 2016 [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/lxwTrO>. [Accessed 31 January 2016]. Ravettino Destefanis, Alejandra (2011). ”La producción de contenidos literarios en Internet. Emprendimientos culturales y autogestión”, ponencia presentada en las IX Jornadas de Sociología Capitalismo del Siglo XXI, crisis y reconiguraciones. Luces y sombras en América Latina, del 08 al 12 de agosto de 2011, Buenos Aires. Ravettino Destefanis, Alejandra (2016). Cultura escrita, tiempo libre y jóvenes universitarios. Acerca de las prácticas e imágenes vinculadas con la lectura, los contenidos y los soportes. Buenos Aires: Teseo Press. Available at <https://www.teseopress.com/ culturaescrita/>. [Accessed 31 January 2016]. Salinger, Jerome David (1951). he Catcher in the Rye. [online]. Available at <https:// goo.gl/rhEpNp>. [Accessed 05 February 2016]. Twain, Mark (1876). he Adventures of Tom Sawyer. [online]. Available at <https://goo. gl/GaEO4M>. [Accessed 05 February 2016]. Verne, Jules (1865). From the Earth to the Moon. [online]. Available at <https://goo.gl/ lcJalb>. [Accessed 05 February 2016]. 110 9 Internet Mukbang (Foodcasting) in South Korea Seok-Kyeong Hong & Sojeong Park s the saying goes, “We are what we eat”; food is closely related to one’s identity. Recently in Korea, Internet users have shed new light on eating through online content called mukbang1. Mukbang is primarily known as an online broadcast genre of Afreeca TV2, the largest MCN (Multi-Channel Network) in Korea. Individuals called BJs (Broadcasting Jockeys) can broadcast whatever content they want, and viewers can tune in to any channel and enjoy watching them while chatting with the BJs. At the time of writing (2016), about 3,500 channels are on air every day and typically 150-300 thousand users access the live broadcasts. Afreeca TV provides a virtual space for people to communicate whatever they want. Ater Afreeca TV began service in 2006, it gained sudden popularity during the anti-US beef import protest of 2008.3 Mukbang appeared on Afreeca TV the same year, and has since then expanded dramatically in numbers and formats. Today, 10-15 per cent of all the channels ofer the mukbang genre, with many BJs displaying their own styles of eating and broadcasting. he fact that BJs earn a great deal of money by eating on screen surprised the media. hey covered this new phenomenon with great attention, especially its economy system: Afreeca TV has a unique proit system entailing the “star balloon”, a type of currency within Afreeca TV. Viewers send star balloons to BJs as a sign of appreciation. One star A 111 Hong, Seok-Kyeong & Park, Sojeong (2017). Internet Mukbang (Foodcasting) in South Korea in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom copyright: AfreecaTV Seok-Kyeong Hong & Sojeong Park balloon costs 10 cents, and viewers can send them to BJs as much as they want while watching a program. Afreeca TV usually gets 30-40 per cent of the proit, while the BJs get 60-70 per cent. hrough this process, popular mukbang BJs can earn as much as thousands of dollars a night. As mukbang has gained in popularity, television programs have adopted its terms and ideas, and new programs appropriating features of mukbang have been successful. his phenomenon provides an interesting case of Internet subculture transforming the legitimate discourse produced by conventional media. his article examines mukbang, as provided by Afreeca TV, and analyzes its implications on contemporary Korean society. Deining mukbang as a new and unique phenomenon developed in a speciic socio-historical context of Korea, we will discuss its aesthetics and ethics, which break the norms of traditional food culture and challenge the social norms governing the body and subjectivity. Furthermore, this 112 Internet Mukbang (Foodcasting) in South Korea study addresses the question of how cultural practices on the Internet have challenged the legitimate food culture on TV programs. Eating in the wonderland of mukbang BJs, the eaters “he Diva”, an attractive young woman with a perfect body, is one of the most famous mukbang BJs. Nearly every day she eats in front of the camera, live broadcasting this for about three hours. Her meals usually consist of multiple courses with abnormally large portions. For example, she eats ive portions of noodles and a kilo of chicken in two hours, or four diferent kinds of large pizzas. Sometimes she stimulates her viewers’ senses via sounds sizzling of meat, chewing, or the dripping of sauce. his usually accompanies her description of the food’s taste. Besides the Diva, over 1,000 BJs provide mukbang. We observed 30 mukbang BJs who are currently active, and tried to clarify some of their typologies. he irst type can be called the “big food ighter”. BJs of this type have a large, over-sized physique. hey frequently launch food challenges: one of them once attempted to inish ive bowls of Chinese-style Korean noodles in a very short time. Another has inished ten bowls of this noodle dish in ten minutes, which is a record no other BJ has yet broken. Another has eaten a hundred pieces of sushi at one sitting. And so it goes. he second type is the “calm eater”. Calm eaters rarely make a fuss, instead only focusing on eating. hey do not attempt any extreme challenges, but they do eat quite large portions of foods neatly and with great delight. hey provide information about the food and kindly answer viewer questions. Some give detailed information about a new brand or new food on the market, as well as a highly analytical explanation of the food. Others show unique layouts on the screen in order to stimulate viewers’ visual and auditory senses. he third type is the “weirdo”, who broadcasts eccentric behaviors. An overweight person displaying a grotesque and tough eating style is considered so hilarious that it is even known among foreigners. A man wearing strange makeup demonstrates odd mukbang, such as wrestling with a large octopus while cooking or popping corn in a frying pan, causing it to pop all around the room, which appeals a great deal to viewers. 113 Seok-Kyeong Hong & Sojeong Park he fourth type is the “cook”. Cook BJs actually cook and eat the foods they make, explaining the recipes to the viewers. Some have previously worked as cooks at hotels or other institutions. Making use of their experience, they provide both cookbang, and mukbang. he ith type is the “pretty boy/girl”. BJs of this type usually focus on their looks and communicate with their fans. Mukbang seems to be a subordinate theme here, since they do not eat much and talk very little about food. hey set up the lighting to make their facial complexion look fair. Female BJs wear heavy makeup and sexy outits, and some male BJs show their pretty faces and slim bodies as well. Fried chicken and convenience stores: The social implications of food in mukbang Fried chicken appears the most frequently on mukbang. In Korea, fried chicken is popular as a late-night snack and is usually delivered. here are two crucial moments that have formed people’s particular perception of fried chicken. he irst was in 1997, when the economic crisis struck Korea. Many of those who lost their jobs at the time opened fried chicken stores with their severance pay; otherwise, a great number of these people would have been ruined. Since then, there is a perception in Korea that fried chicken stores are one of the last solutions for those who have been ired or retire from their careers. Furthermore, during the 2002 World Cup, the demand for fried chicken increased dramatically as Koreans consume it, along with beer, while watching football matches on TV. As a result, the number of fried chicken stores soared from 10,000 to 25,000, creating the conception of fried chicken as the most popular delivery food. Many BJs also consume foods from convenience stores, buying instant foods, and even ingredients such as eggs and onions, there. According to Jeon (2013), the convenience store is an emblem of the “McDonaldization of society” and is a new urban infrastructure in the highly individualized contemporary society. Korean cities, especially Seoul, are full of so-called “homo nomads”, students and workers living apart from their families. To these people, convenience stores provide food eiciently and comfortably, since they are stocked with all kinds of items. In another sense, the convenience store is an impersonalized space that economizes one’s eforts. 114 Internet Mukbang (Foodcasting) in South Korea Besides fried chicken, a variety of delivery foods are consumed in mukbang – not only pizza and Chinese food, but virtually everything, is deliverable in Korea, from hamburgers to sukiyaki. Recently, the term “nation of delivery’ was coined for Koreans, portraying the country’s excellent food delivery system. According to Choi (2013), Korea’s delivery system relects the society’s exhaustion, whereby people are obsessed with inishing things as quickly as possible. In sum, what BJs eat contains multidimensional meanings that relect the current history of Korean society. he prevalence of impersonal relationships and individualization are materialized in their menus. Even though they are consuming junk food, eating this food appeals to many viewers and elicits empathy. The aesthetics and ethics of mukbang Mukbang exhibits unique aesthetics and ethics, which transgress the conventional norms of the food culture in Korea. First of all, it detaches itself from traditional values regarding meals, such as healthiness and sincerity. Before 2008, all Korean TV food programs concentrated on healthiness: they usually introduced high-quality foods provided by legitimate restaurants, regional foods with a long history, healthy recipes for homemade meals, and information about healthy ingredients. he foods presented by the media were attractively prepared and served in a pleasant atmosphere with many people gathered around. hese are fundamentally important aspects of the Korean traditional table, and the media did their best to support them. However, mukbang values neither the good nutrition nor the cozy sentiment that comes from whole-hearted food. It encourages viewers to enjoy instant meals, frozen foods, and junk foods that are easily affordable at convenience stores. Also, BJs mostly eat spicy or greasy foods with a high caloric content. herefore, the mukbang menus are far from what conventional food programs would portray. A few BJs do cook the food themselves, but they still lack the cozy sentiment of the traditional table and the common sense of cooking. For example, a BJ called Mr. Jaw makes popcorn in a frying pan, enjoying the corn popping all over the place, and BJ Pooh makes onigiri that is as big as his head. Secondly, mukbang reverses table manners by showing people grabbing or shoveling food, and devouring it sloppily. Since BJs con115 Seok-Kyeong Hong & Sojeong Park copyright: AfreecaTV tinuously communicate with their viewers, they frequently talk with their mouths full. hey do not hide the sounds of their eating, but rather emphasize them to deliver a liveliness and stimulate viewers’ senses. Some BJs moan, cough, and curse while they eat spicy foods. hey don’t mind blowing their noses, burping, or even spitting. While some viewers express disgust at these behaviors, most accept them as natural and authentic reactions of the BJs. hese rude table manners are typically detected among male BJs. his strengthens the gender stereotype of eating, in which men are allowed to eat wildly but women are expected to maintain their grace. Even though some female BJs are known to eat large portions of food and shovel it in their mouths, they still manage to look pleasant. hirdly, BJs repetitively challenge themselves to eat extremely spicy food, which looks quite sadistic. hey moan, cry out, cough, and have a runny nose while eating these foods. Many viewers ind this funny, and 116 Internet Mukbang (Foodcasting) in South Korea ask them to eat other, new spicy foods or add more capsaicin powder to increase the spiciness. his aspect is interesting, as it also shows a gender diference: it is usually male BJs who challenge themselves to eat foods in a sadistic way. hey continue adding spiciness for fun, or in desire of conquest: the more spiciness they endure, the more viewers will like them and the more manly they believe they look. A few female BJs enjoy eating spicy foods, but they hold back their pain or express it in a calmer way. Sometimes they look erotic while eating this type of food, breathing heavily and moaning, thereby exciting some viewers and earning balloons from them. Lastly, mukbang portrays BJs swallowing masses of calories of food, neglecting the social pressure to have a slender body. In other words, BJs explicitly show themselves abusing their own bodies. In contemporary Korean society great attention is paid to body size, but mukbang BJs do not seem to care about this tacit social requirement on body. Many of them consume tens of thousands of calories at a time, usually at night. Yet most female BJs are slimmer than the average Korean woman. Many viewers ind this surprising, and frequently ask about their weight. his transgresses the universal law that the more one eats, the more weight one gains. The social context of mukbang Single-person households One of the most noticeable changes in Korea’s social structure is the increase in single-person households. According to 2015 population statistics, there are about 5.2 million single-person households; this accounts for 27 per cent of all households and is the irst household type to surpass the traditional four- or three-person household. It is predicted that this igure will rise continuously, to reach 34 per cent in 2035. his change is partly attributed to the increase in senior citizens living alone due to aging, but also to the increase in young people in their twenties and thirties living alone, reluctant to marry due to their unstable careers. hese young single-person households have afected the industry and consumption structure to such a degree that the term “single economy” has appeared. his change serves as an important background to the advent of mukbang. It is not pleasurable for single-person households to prepare 117 Seok-Kyeong Hong & Sojeong Park Table 1. Year Number Percentage Number and percentage of single-person households in Korea 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 382,743 660,941 1,021,481 1,642,406 2,224,433 3,170,675 4,142,165 5,203,440 4.8 6.9 9.0 12.7 15.5 20.0 24.9 27.2 Source: Statistics Korea (2015). Demographic Trend Census food only for themselves and eat alone in silence, as this lacks the cozy atmosphere of a family gathering. So they tend to face the TV or a computer monitor while eating, with mukbang serving as their “meal mate”, soothing their loneliness during mealtime. People usually access mukbang around mealtime or late-night snack time. he particularity of the Asian table culture can be a complementary explanation for the advent of mukbang.4 Since the staple food of Asian countries is rice, a culture of side dishes has developed. herefore, unlike Western countries, Koreans serve several kinds of side dishes and consume them together. So regardless of whether one lives with family or not, one has to set a table consisting of several dishes; this is a great burden to single-person households, most of which contain people in their twenties to early thirties, who lack the knowledge, ability and time for cooking. Mukbang fulfills both the physical and sentimental hunger of single-person households. First, it fulills viewers’ physical hunger by providing simple recipes or tips for eating alone. BJs introduce newly released small-portion foods that can be prepared easily. Also, while people living alone oten cannot order diverse menus at one time, many BJs are gourmands who eat a great deal of diverse foods in one sitting, thereby ofering viewers a vicarious satisfaction. As Georg Simmel said, “the shared meal…lits an event of physiological primitivity and inescapable commonality into the sphere of social interaction” (Probyn, 1999), while eating alone lacks social interaction. Food deinitely plays a social role that creates bonds between people.5 Many single-person households are in want of this bond, but are suiciently individualized to have given up inding someone to share a meal with. Instead, they try to overcome their sentimental hunger through the interactive nature of mukbang. hey soothe their loneliness by eating in front of a computer and communicating via the keyboard. 118 Internet Mukbang (Foodcasting) in South Korea herefore, mukbang is a channel that somewhat drags people out toward social communication. Still, the question remains as to whether this can create a sincere bond and serve a communal function. Internet, the surplusage generation, and media culture As Korea entered an information-intensive society within a very short period, the Internet became a very powerful media tool that inluenced society in general. he collective power formed in cyberspace satirizes the mainstream culture; and people strengthen their online networking with the object in which they can be immersed, weakening oline networking (Lee, 2010). hese characteristics are backgrounds to the Korean Internet culture that began appearing in the 2000s. Korea’s Internet culture accompanied the recent phenomenon of “surplusage culture”. “Surplusage” (”(잉여; Ying-Yeo) is a neologism indicating a person wandering around cyberspace, creating parodies, compounds, and distorted expressions, investing their abundant time capital. hese activities that seem tedious and useless make up a great cultural stream on the Internet. Surplusage culture is characterized as useless, extreme, trivial, stupid, reckless, and immature.6 Kim (2011) deines the activity of surplusage as something that is done with a great self-satisfying passion but is not given any value at all in a social sense. Mukbang is deinitely an activity of surplusage in the sense that Kim explains. Mukbang BJs consider themselves surplusage. heir food challenges and eating in front of strangers are completely useless things, except for a few BJs who earn enough money to allow them not to have to hold other jobs. Most BJs start their broadcasts solely for their own satisfaction and fun. Mukbang viewers consider themselves surplusage as well. hey are conscious that they have nothing to do except watch the dumb behavior of other surplusages and sneer at themselves. In contemporary Korean society, the young generation is sufering from severe competition and high unemployment rates. Many young people ind themselves without a job or ailiation ater a long education, and feel lost. Oicially, most of them can be classiied as NEET (Not in Education, Employment or Training). he number of NEET in Korea has increased to 1.63 million, which accounts for 17 per cent of youth aged 15 to 29 years. Some 42 per cent of these young NEET 119 Seok-Kyeong Hong & Sojeong Park % 50 47 45.4 45.3 44 45 40.9 42.3 40 40.5 39.3 35 30 2005 2008 2011 2014 Year Figure 1. Rate of students and employed among non-NEET, aged 15 to 29 (per cent) Source: Hyundai Research Institute (2015). Characteristics and Implications of Young NEET. are without a job for more than a year. Graph 1 indicates the rate of students and employed among the population aged 15 to 29, and shows that the rate of students is rising while that of those who are employed is decreasing. his implies that a growing number of students in their twenties postpone graduation, failing to ind a decent job. Since their student status gives them a feeling of belonging or stability, they tend to remain students. hus, the percentage of the NEET could be more than statistics indicators, and the fear of NEET being their near future is a shared sentiment among the young population. he parent generation of the NEET had to survive the post-economic crisis of 1997, with many opening fried chicken or convenience stores as their last resort, as mentioned. he NEET, who are in the atermath of the economic crisis of the late 2000s, do not even dare start a business. he prevalent sense of “social loser” among young people and their socioeconomic status as NEET sustain the online surplusage culture. Consuming fried chicken and convenience store foods on camera, and watching it, might be one of the ways of enduring this time of defeatism. 120 Internet Mukbang (Foodcasting) in South Korea Conclusion: Subcultural power and the hegemonic process As mukbang gained in popularity, a hegemonic process taken on by conventional TV is observed: new TV food programs have recently appropriated the culinary aesthetics and ethical attitudes developed by Internet mukbang (Hong & Park, 2016). Conventional food programs have typically introduced fancy foods cooked by professional chefs, or exotic foods that are not available in everyday life. Also, they have always emphasized the healthiness of foods and recipes. But, as they embrace the ethics of mukbang, they have started portraying junk food such as instant, frozen, and high-calorie foods. he standard of excellence concerning food has been altered as well. Its excellence was originally evaluated based on taste, presentation, the elaborateness of recipes, and the professionalism of chefs. But ater mukbang’s inluence on TV, it is judged only by the eater’s satisfaction. If the eater is content with the food, it does not matter how much fat or spice is used to prepare it. hus, the hegemony of judgement for cooking and food has shited from top-class chefs to ordinary eaters. TV programs do not exactly copy the formats of Internet mukbang, but rather adapt them to the television platform by negotiating with the norms of conventional food programs: they are either aired on a cable channel (which requires less public responsibility than terrestrial channels) or aired late at night on terrestrial channels; and they omit, dilute or rework the components of Internet mukbang. Also, TV appropriates Internet mukbang, rearticulating the dominant diferential system of gender into a new format. In traditional food culture it is the woman who cooks for the family, with the exception that the man does the cooking when it comes to “creation”.7 his role division between the sexes seemed nulliied in Internet mukbang, with women and men eating on both sides of the screen and the cooking diminished to an instant boiling or replaced with delivery foods. But in the mukbang-inluenced TV programs most cooking guests are men, and professional male chefs are considered sexy; on the other hand, men as everyday cooks and nurturers are portrayed as efeminate. his representation still holds onto the dominant ideology of the sexual labor division between the creator/producer and the re-creator/reproducer. 121 Seok-Kyeong Hong & Sojeong Park However, we can still say that it is a remarkable phenomenon that mukbang is imposing negotiations for TV to deal with a new system of value regarding the food culture, even though it is contrary to the justiied and consensual values of good nutrition. his proves how powerful the inluence of the Internet media culture on contemporary Korean society is. Mukbang, marked by its special expressivity, resonates with the social and communicational needs of the surplusage generation, the majority of them living alone and eating alone. he generational dimension of Internet mukbang and its anti-conventional aesthetics and ethics toward the body and the diet permit us to interpret it as a unique subcultural practice. he self-consciousness of viewers’ NEET situation and of the nature of the time-consuming “useless” activities they are practicing through mukbang creates a subcultural potential for the youth. Notes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Abbreviation for food broadcasting in Korean, which can be translated to ‘foodcasting’. It includes all kinds of programs on TV and the Internet showing scenes of eating as an important part of the content. Abbreviation for ‘Any Free Casting’ TV. During the protest, thousands of people occupied the streets and police took action to control the demonstrators. People who were angry at the police brutality started ilming with their portable recording devices to deliver lively scenes and expose the violence. In the process, Afreeca TV was mobilized as a main platform for these recordings. he high rate of single-person households alone cannot explain the advent of mukbang, since Western countries also have a great deal of single-person households. In Northern European countries such as Denmark, Norway and Finland, the share of single-person households reached 40per cent in the 2000s. (URL: http://ec.europa. eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/People_in_the_EU_%E2%80%93_statistics_on_household_and_family_structures) he word “companion” originates from the meaning “person who eats bread with someone else”. In Korea as well, there are some words that indicate the importance of food in human relationship, such as “bapjung, an attachment that grows between people who share meals for a long time. For example, some count the number of strawberry seeds in a strawberry yogurt pot, collect all the bones ater eating chicken, or hack a certain Internet server for no reason. he extreme majority of professional chefs are male. Seok-Kyeong Hong, Associate Professor, Department of Communication, Seoul National University, South Korea, skhong63@snu.ac.kr Sojeong Park, Doctoral Student, Department of Communication, Seoul National University, South Korea, psj25psj25@snu.ac.kr 122 Internet Mukbang (Foodcasting) in South Korea References Cha, Frances (2014). South Korea’s online trend: Paying to watch a pretty girl eat. CNN, 3 February 2014 [online]. Available at <http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/29/world/ asia/korea-eating-room/>. [Accessed 25 October 2016]. Choi, J. (2013). Sociology of Delivery, pp. 49-84 in Suan Lee (ed.) Cultural Escape of Korean Society. Seoul: Green. People in the EU – who are we and how do we live? (2015, 6). Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/People_in_the_EU_%E2%80%93_ statistics_on_household_and_family_structures. [Accessed 13 February 2017]. Evans, Stephen (2015). The Koreans who televise themselves eating dinner. BBC News, 5 February 2015 [online]. Available at <http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31130947>. [Accessed 25 October 2016]. Hong, Sojeong, & Park, Seok-Kyeong (2016). he Emergence of Internet Mukbang (Foodcasting) and its Hegemonic Process in Media Culture. Media & Society, 24(1): 105-150. Hyundai Research Institute (2015). Characteristics and Implications of Young NEET. [online]. Available at <http://hri.co.kr/upload/publication/20151238612[1].pdf>. [Accessed 25 October 2016]. Jeon, S. (2013). Exploration of Urbanites’ Life and Culture through Convenience Store, pp. 207-234 in Suan Lee (ed.) Cultural Escape of Korean Society. Seoul: Green. Jeong, H. (2011). Research on Social Structural Characteristics of Single-person Households in Korea and Japan. Paper presented at the conference he 9th Symposium of the Japanese Language Literature Association of Korea, 30 June – 2 July 2011, at Keimyung University, Daegu. Joo, C. Y. (2013). Hunger Society. Paju: Geulhangari. Kim, Soo-Hwan (2011). he New Structure of Feeling in Webtoon. Beyond Borders Humanities, 4(2):101-123. Lee, Hyunjoo (2010). he Coniguration of the Korean Cyberspace: A Tentative Study on Cultural Traits of Korean Internet Users. Social Science Collection, 12: 123-153. Probyn, Elspeth (1999). Beyond Food/Sex: Eating and an Ethics of Existence. heory, Culture & Society, 16(2): 215-228. Rauhala, Emily (2014). South Korean ‘Diva’ Makes $9000 a Month Eating on Camera. Time, 26 March 2014 [online]. Available at <http://time.com/38219/south-koreafood-blogger>. [Accessed 25 October 2016]. Shin, C. (2013). South Korea-Japan French Fries Competition – Story about Teenagers’ International Competition. Joseilbo, 6 March 2013 [online]. Available at <http:// ent.joseilbo.com/htmls/173786.html>. [Accessed 25 October 2016]. Statistics Korea (2015). Demographic Trend Census. [online]. Available at <http:// kosis.kr/statisticsList/statisticsList_01List.jsp?vwcd=MT_ZTITLE&parmTabId=M_01_01>. [Accessed 25 October 2016]. 123 10 “Transmedia Storytelling as a Narrative Expansion” Interview with Carlos Scolari C arlos A. Scolari has a Ph.D. in Applied Linguistics and Communication Languages (Catholic University of Milan, Italy) and a Degree in Social Communication (University of Rosario, Argentina). He is Associate Professor (tenure) at the Department of Communication of the University Pompeu Fabra (Barcelona, Spain). Researcher specialized in transmedia storytelling, collaborative culture, user-generated contents, narratology, and semiotics of new media. Professor in diferent master and PhD courses in Europe and Latin America1. Could you give us an introduction about the concepts of Transmedia Literacy and Transmedia Storytelling? As Henry Jenkins put it, at the most basic level transmedia stories “are stories told across multiple media”. Transmedia Storytelling is not just an adaptation from one media to another: it is a narrative expansion. his textual dispersion is one of the most important sources of complexity in contemporary popular culture. his narrative expansion is one of the basic properties of transmedia storytelling; the second one is the participation of users in that narrative expansion. How? Producing new contents, for example parodies, new stories, trailers, mashups, or recapitulations. Only in Fanciction.net Harry Potter’s fans have shared more than 730,000 new stories! his is the territory of participatory cultures, one of the most interesting phenomena emerging from contemporary media ecology. In this context, we are working around a 125 “Transmedia Storytelling as a narrative expansion”. Interview with Carlos Scolari in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Interview with Carlos Scolari new concept: transmedia literacy. From our perspective, transmedia literacy could be understood as a set of skills, practices, values, priorities, sensibilities, and learning/sharing strategies developed and applied in the context of the new participatory cultures. If traditional literacy was book-centred or, in the case of media literacy, mostly television-centred, then multimodal literacy places digital networks and interactive media experiences at the centre of its analytical and practical experience. Traditional forms of literacy generally treated the subject as illiterate, while media literacy focused on the consumer as a passive spectator; transmedia literacy, however, considers the subject to be a prosumer (producer + consumer). Another essential element of transmedia literacy is the learning space. he institutional learning environment for traditional forms of literacy is the school, but new generations are now developing their transmedia literacy skills outside the school (from YouTube to online forums, social media, and blogs). hese informal learning spaces will be a key component of transmedia literacy research. You are the researcher leader of Transmedia Literacy project funded by European Union. What can you tell us about it? We want to introduce new questions and challenges to traditional media literacy. If traditional media literacy was about how to teach youths to deal with (broadcast) media, in this case we are proposing diferent questions: What are teens doing with media? What do they know? How did they learn to do it? Teens are doing many things with media! hey play videogames, share pictures, learn to solve problems, create new contents, and manage their online life. Where did they learn to do that? Outside the school. hese are the main research questions of the Transmedia Literacy H2020 research project. he research started in April 2015 and will inish in March 2018. We are developing the research in eight countries. Why is it important to focus on non-formal educational settings when investigating teens uses of media? Because most of their knowledge about new interactive media comes from non-formal and informal environments. When a child or a teen 126 “Transmedia Storytelling as a Narrative Expansion” Image 1 & 2. Students analyse and reflect on social media and transmedia narrative worlds Image 3. Students during the narrative workshop (fanfiction production / narrative expansions) has a problem to solve (How to move to next level in this videogame? How to manipulate an Instagram ilter?), they do not ask their parents or the teachers: they check their favourite YouTube channels, ask their friends or consult an online community. We should be able to map this territory, identify the ‘transmedia skills’ they are developing outside the school and be able to exploit these skills inside the classroom. In this context, at the end of the Transmedia Literacy project we will produce a Professor’s Kit so any teacher can download didactic activities to exploit the transmedia skills inside the school. 127 Interview with Carlos Scolari What is the project status until now and expected outcomes? Right now (November 2016) we are inishing the ieldwork in the diferent countries and starting the data processing. Even if we use nVivo for Teams, this is a very slow process, we have so many inputs (data from surveys, workshops, interviews, media consume diaries, researchers’ notes, videos, pictures, etc.). In 2017, we will conclude the data processing and inal analysis, and we will work on the creation of the Professor’s Kit. We will organise a couple of international events in Europe and Latin America to disseminate the scientiic outcomes and present the kit. In 2008, you co-edited the book “Colabor_arte. Medios y artes en la era de la producción colaborativa” (Media and arts in the era of collaborative production). Is there any need to distinguish between creative and collaborative media production by youth from what is considered art? How to delimit it? hat book presents diferent experiences of user-generated contents in media and art. he editors – Mario Carlón, from the Universidad of Buenos Aires, and I – consider there is a ‘continuum’ between art and media practices. In that context, the user-generated contents move from one side to the other. Many users produce content (like the parodies of Hitler in Downfall) that follow the same logic of artists: they ‘intervene’ mainstream contents to generate new interpretations. Duchamp did something similar when he drew a moustache and beard on a postcard of Mona Lisa! he production of new contents by youth, both inspired by media or art, is an unexplored territory. his could be one of the next challenges of Transmedia Literacy research. You have been doing research about transmedia storytelling, user-generated content, and participatory culture for many years. What are the most fascinating findings about your studies on digital content creation by young people? he creative of user-generated contents is incredible. Fans have a lot of time, they know how to deal with the most advanced sotware and, the most important thing, they have much passion. It is not easy to separate between youth and adult faniction or user-generated contents (sometimes the creators just use a nickname). However, fans know how to organise themselves and generate emerging complex projects that 128 “Transmedia Storytelling as a Narrative Expansion” may involve hundreds of people. For example, fans have created movies with professional-level special efects inspired by Star Trek, Halo, or he Lord of the Rings. In our research, we have found teens that organise international teams to play online videogames like Counterstrike, or girls writing and sharing faniction in collaborative platforms like Wattpad. Even if we do not believe in the mythology of the ‘digital natives’ (like adults, not all teens are geeks or digital experts), in every class it was not diicult for the research team to identify advanced videogame players or media content creators. And the most intriguing dilemmas? As the research is developing in diferent countries, we only stay with the teens for about a month, sometimes a month and a half. We are thinking about staying more time with them in future projects. In their last book (he Class), Sonia Livingstone and Julian Seton-Green describe an interesting research experience: they stayed for almost one year in the same school. hat is possible if you only work in a single country. In our case, it would be impossible to do something like that in eight countries. However, we have obtained much data about transmedia skills, media practices, and informal learning strategies. From a general point of view, the big challenge is to redesign the relationship between schools, teens, families, and media. he school is an interface between kids and knowledge. hat interface is in crisis. Both ecologies, the media ecology and the educational ecology, are going through deep mutations and we must learn how to deal with them. If you could send a message to parents and to teachers about children and youth media creative production, what would you say? What do they need to be aware or inspired by? Listen to the teens. When we tested our methodology in a school at Barcelona, one of the kids said: “I can inally talk about the things that interest me”. Note 1. https://transmedialiteracy.org/the-people/ 129 11 Conversations on Creativity and Communication Carmilla Floyd ow do children and young people use social media as a creative outlet? As a journalist specialising in children and youth culture, I have travelled extensively in Europe, Asia, Africa, and the United States, collecting stories about children and young people’s lives. For this book, I decided to reach out through my network to a select number of youngsters who have sparked my curiosity through their social media feeds. From teenagers to young adults, they all seem to master the media in the sense that they have taken control of their digital identities. Using visual imagery and words, they decide how they want to be perceived by others, not the other way around. he conversations took place online and some asked me not to publish their real names or @handles. H • In my home country Sweden, I spoke to Alex, DJ, law student Valeria and high school student Xuan, who posts aesthetically about everything from lipstick to kpop and xenophobia. • In Shanghai, China, I chatted with Tony, who uses his social media skills both privately and for proit, promoting luxury brands online. • Ayanda “Yaya” Nhlapo, TV host and fashion designer, shared her ideas from her home in Johannesburg, South Africa, for example about ‘making her dreams a reality one sequin at a time’. 131 Floyd, Carmilla (2017). Conversations on Creativity and Communication in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Carmilla Floyd • In Los Angeles, United States, Xicana1 activist and DJ Roseli explained why she thinks that people of colour should use social media to ’carve out their own culture’. In LA, I also chatted to Erik, student and gay/queer activist who shared his feelings about being creative but also stalked and threatened online. • Finally, Phuong, from Hanoi in Vietnam, communicated from her temporary home in Berlin, Germany, where she studies photography. Below, read some excerpts. Tell us a little bit about why and how you use social media Erik: I use all of them relatively diferently but also use them all together. So there are things that I will post on Instagram that will always show up on my Facebook and my Twitter. hese will range from selies to places where I’ve been, but mostly selies. I use a lot of # so that people can look it up. Snapchat is more of a tool I use to send pics and chat with people safely without giving my number out. Phuong: I like to share both my photos and my opinions about world politics, the environment, and social afairs, especially relating to children and women, culture, and entertainment. I share stuf like breaking news but also interesting stories, videos and photo essays that have inspired me and that I think can inspire others. Yaya: I use a wide range of social media platforms and each platform has its own use, although many are similar. I go according to the use of each one, feel and vibe, as well as the audience and reach. For example, on Instagram and Facebook I share what I do in fashion and other areas while I use Pinterest to be inspired, Snapchat for fun and Twitter for information and news. Alex: I use both Facebook and Instagram to promote when I am going to DJ somewhere. For inspiration and ideas, I go on Instagram and Youtube. Roseli: For me, as a Xicana, social media is deinitely an important way to communicate with other people of colour, a way for us to ‘carve out our own culture’ instead of being interpreted and appropriated by others. It is via these social networks I have met many of the people that I’ve 132 Conversations on Creativity and Communication collaborated with on creative projects, as a model, an artist, DJ and more. Social media is also usually the platform where we release the projects we work on together. Social media is also my news outlet, where I ind out about issues in real time, oten before they break in the established news channels. I used to be active on more platforms but currently I only use Twitter and Instagram, where I publish events related to activism, my personal life – mainly my dog – and music. I also promote events, hosted by friends, or that I am part of in any way. I used to have a Tumblr and that deinitely was an inspiration because of the amount of images I was seeing being posted by the like-minded people I followed. Most of them were also Xicanxs, queer and gender non-conforming people of colour. It made me feel like I wasn’t alone and became a sort of lifeline. Xicana activist and DJ Roseli uses social media to carve out her own culture Image 1. Roseli’s images 133 Carmilla Floyd Valeria: I use Instagram to express myself, and to desperately try to stay a tiny little bit creative while trying to stay alive in the world of academics. I mainly use Facebook and Snapchat for communication with friends, and for collaborating with people in diferent projects. With my Chinese friends, I have to use WeChat, due to censorship and the ‘great ire wall of China’. I post and chat there to make sure my friends remember me and don’t think I’m dead. I actually think WeChat and its multitude of cute smileys are way more creative for chatting than the stuf ofered on Facebook. Tony: I use only WeChat, I see it as a self-marketing tool. Not to further my career, but as a way to show my personality and myself in the way I want. When like-minded people see what I post, it gives me a chance to meet interesting people and to build relationships. From a marketing perspective, they are my ‘target audiences’ that consume my content. But I don’t want them to buy a product, only to get to know me. Of course, I also use social media for information and inspiration in general. Xuan: I use social media for creative expression, to connect with friends and new people, to promote my interests, and get inspiration, information, and news. Facebook is mostly to communicate with friends, others, and to call out racism, homophobia, and xenophobia. If I experience racism or prejudices IRL (In Real Life), I will sometimes share that story on Facebook, to let people know how they should not act. Snapchat is for spontaneous fun and communication. I also use Tumblr to be inspired and inspire others. What type of content do you post? Valeria: Instagram is the only creative outlet I have online where I post stuf that I create myself. I post more personal content there, though my followers might not realize that, as I rarely explain what a particular picture means to me. It might be a photo taken when meeting someone I love, when doing something I hate, or from when I’m feeling down and sick and tired of everything and everyone. Alex: I use my Instagram as a photo-diary so I can post pretty much anything there. Facebook is a little more private so I don’t want too much weird stuf there. I post things about my life that I think are interesting 134 Conversations on Creativity and Communication to my friends. Cute stuf or selies gets the most reactions and likes. A photo of homemade food does well too. Yaya: I post to inspire people and to inluence them for the better. I also post content that people can relate to, which afects the reactions on my posts. Phuong, from Hanoi in Vietnam, studies photography in Berlin, Germany and uses social media to communicate and share her images and ideas. 2 4 3 Image 2. This is Phuong, in Hanoi, Image 3. Berlin Wall, Image 4. Berlin Street Phuong: I post mostly my own documentary and street photos. I also raise arguments, give my point of view about social problems, especially on environmental issues and stories relating to journalistic ethics. And I share my feelings about places, cities I live in or travel to. 135 Carmilla Floyd What don’t you share on social media? Alex: I don’t like to advocate for issues I feel strongly about on social media. It feels too private. Phuong: I mostly try to be objective and I prefer a well-organised and minimalist look. I rarely share private stuf, personal information, or photos of family, publicly. Valeria: On Facebook I never share anything private anymore. No feelings, good or bad, no anxieties, no life happenings, nothing. Facebook is overloaded with information, why would my information be more important than others? Does your social media activity reflect who you really are? Tony: I never share content that I feel doesn’t relate to me or relect myself. I like to be spontaneous, the moment I feel like it, I share and post. Xuan: It relects the person I want to be on that account. Who I want to be can change over time. I oten change my handles to relect that change, and I have a lot of diferent accounts on, for example, Instagram. Some are private, some public or semi-private. I allow my mother on some but not on all! I oten erase accounts, or my whole feed, and start fresh with a new style. Erik: What I put out there is really I. All my social media without a shadow of a doubt screams I am a Queer, POC2, Native American and more. Valeria: My Instagram relects who I am way more than Facebook does. I feel like I mainly use Instagram for myself. Sometimes when I wonder, “wth am I doing with my life?” I look through my feed over these last two years or so, and I feel better. My Instagram is a storyteller, maybe not to my followers, but to me, about myself. Do you put in a lot of work when creating your content? Tony: No, I don’t think it is creative to do too [much] stuf on social media on purpose. 136 Conversations on Creativity and Communication Yaya: I do both planned content that is well thought of, and spontaneous content as a channel of self-expression, which I post with a little less structure and thought, and more freedom. I always stick to high quality, visually stimulating images and videos. My captions are also of a high standard, in the sense that I write to express myself and share my story. hat’s what primarily gets me the most reactions or likes too. Ayanda “Yaya” Nhlapo, TV host and fashion designer in South Africa, shares glimpses of her life and work on her SM accounts, and tries to inspire and influence her followers for the better. Image 5. “Yaya” Xuan: I do mostly, but sometimes I just get lucky with a shot. Angles, location, and lighting is vital. I take a lot of selies in the restroom in my high school restroom, because I like the clean look of luorescent lights and white tiles. I always work with the images, picking ilters and colours that go with the tone and look of my diferent feeds. 137 Carmilla Floyd Xuan uses social media for creative expression, and always works with the images, picking filters and colors that go with the tone and look of her diferent SM feeds. 6 7 9 4 8 Image 6. Xuan showing of her nails and a new bag, Image 7. Xuan showing of her brand new velvet shoes, Images 8 & 9. These two photos were taken at an exhibition by Doug Aitken at MOMA in Los Angeles What do you like and dislike most about social media? Alex: I like that I can connect with people, and that I can brag about stuf if I want. Erik: he thing I dislike most is being too exposed. I have had death threats, stalkers, and unwelcome attention, but there was not much I was able to do other than change some privacy settings. he other thing is the social shame that is connected to some of the content that I provide, because it is considered taboo. I ind it disgusting that employers check Facebook to see if people are ‘employable’ by their social media appropriateness. Also, it is unfortunate that people are driven 138 Conversations on Creativity and Communication by likes and sometimes to disconnect from life in order to connect to the Internet. I don’t like sacriicing real life myself. Erik, student and personality, brands himself online as #gay #gayinked #queer #poc #indigenous and more. 10 11 12 13 Image 10. Erik hanging out doing homework, Image 11. Erik posing with the lamp post exhibit at the LACMA museum in Los Angeles, Image 12. Caption on Instagram: “When I bathe my dogs always hang out right next me. The company of my pups are the best. Sometimes Appa insists that I wash behind my ears and if I don’t he will.”, Image 13. Caption on Instagram: “Just hanging out like a Leather Mary. Rocking my leather jacket”. 139 Carmilla Floyd Xuan: I love having access the world at my ingertips. I hate the ignorance, racism, exotism, and sexism. Stupid comments and questions from narrow minded people or douche guys (that I immediately block). Followers asking: ‘Are you from Japan or Korea’, because stereotypes tell them that cool Asians must be from there? But I like that social media ofer me and other young people a platform and safe spaces where we can talk about our feelings, norms, and discrimination. Some of the accounts I follow forbid white people to comment, although they can read the posts and comments that POC and WOC3 make. I think that’s really good, because social media is so full of hate and stupid comments, sometimes we want to say stuf without worrying about being attacked. Rosie: Just the fact that it is available, I like. I believe that the reason why young folks create and share via social media is because the reality of our present and future is so overwhelming. We need any outlet to express ourselves, support others, and unwind with memes. Alex: Sometimes I get annoyed when people close to me write stupid stuf. Valeria: I like that social media lets people express themselves freely, and can connect with other people they’ve never met before. I like that it can be used for activism, for sharing knowledge, and for questioning the status quo. I also dislike when people are too private. Some of my friends, classmates and family members love to spill everything on Facebook – even their arguments with other people. It’s embarrassing and annoying. Do you ever get tired of the digital life? Xuan: Nope, although I just got an Instax camera that uses really expensive ilm. It’s weird because I can take endless shots with my phone and ix them in diferent apps. But with this camera I have to be careful. I click and out comes a tiny photograph that I can’t change! But it gives me a good feeling! All my friends want that camera too. 140 Conversations on Creativity and Communication Law student Valeria uses Instagram to express herself and stay a tiny bit creative as opposed to what she can be in the academic world. Images 14 & 15. Valeria´s pictures Roseli: Well, I do have a lot of vinyls, and I DJ together with the Chulita Vinyl Club in LA. A lot of my friends make artwork that is physical and three dimensional. But then we share promote our stuf online, so it works out well. Valeria: Sometimes. I think it comes from the overload of information we receive online all day, every hour, every minute and second. hen I turn to something analogue, like a DVD or a vinyl record. Analogue creativity takes us back to the roots, in a sense. It lets me relax for a minute, and disconnect from the world. When I listen to my vinyl records I live in the moment, not through the screen of my phone. I can’t switch from one artist to the next in a second. I have the albums I have, the songs I have, and that’s enough. But only until I pick up my phone and have access to everything and nothing is ever enough. And that’s great too! here’s always something new to learn and discover. Carmilla Floyd, Journalist and Communications specialist, Walkie Talkie, Sweden, carmilla@walkie-talkie.com 141 Carmilla Floyd Notes 1. 2. 3. 142 Xicana: a female Mexican-American. POC: abbreviation for people of color, as in everybody except caucasians. WOC: abbreviation for women of color. Collecting and Sharing Creativity Display, share and communicate creative work, share knowledge and exercise freedom of expression – in the following section diferent platforms facilitating this are in focus. We will also eavesdrop on creative peer teaching and learning among two ive-year-olds. 12 “My Portfolio Helps My Making” Motivations and Mechanisms for Documenting Creative Projects Anna Keune, Naomi Thompson, Kylie Peppler & Stephanie Chang W ithin the growing world of makerspaces with youth-oriented educational programs, where youth make anything from robots to costumes to digital games, much of the value of making lies in the process of creating personally and communally meaningful projects (Peppler, Halverson, & Kafai, 2016). By sharing their projects and processes, makers invite constructive feedback, communicate their maker journeys, share their eforts and struggles, and learn through planning and relection (Tseng, 2015a). In fact, the documentation of making regained interest as makers’ portfolios became vital parts of job application and college admissions processes (Byrne & Davidson, 2015). Emerging from the arts (Gardner, 1989), portfolios serve as a response to the increased pressures of accountability, a hopeful alternative for standardized testing, and a way to provide a richer picture of student learning (Niguidula, 1993). Portfolios become valuable learning and community-building tools when they inform overall classroom community learning and allow students to take ownership over their learning (Riconscente, 2000). In makerspaces, the overwhelming majority of educators recognize both the importance of portfolios as learning tools and the diiculty of capturing making as it happens without disrupting or taking time away from the making 145 Keune, Anna, Thompson, Naomi, Peppler, Kylie, & Chang, Stephanie (2017). “My Portfolio Helps My Making.” Motivations and Mechanisms for Documenting Creative Projects in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Anna Keune, Naomi Thompson, Kylie Peppler & Stephanie Chang (Keune, Peppler, Chang, & Regalla, 2015). his can lead to portfolios becoming an aterthought that does not evoke the excitement oten connected with making. Organizers of out-of-school spaces (e.g., ater-school clubs, libraries, museums) particularly ind it challenging to meaningfully integrate the documentation of hands-on projects; despite its perceived importance, documenting is tricky to implement, especially in out-of-school settings without attendance requirements. Portfolio creation to bolster college and job applications may not be suiciently motivational for youth, as this does not directly serve their immediate project needs. It is unclear how to support the capturing and sharing of hands-on creative work in out-of-school makerspaces in a way that is purposeful and meaningful for youth. Educators need examples of youth capturing their projects on their own terms, in their own ways, and on their own time to inform out-of-school portfolio processes. his knowledge gap prompted us to ask: what are the mechanisms and motivators that make the documentation of creative projects immediately purposeful and meaningful for youth? To answer this question, we examined the youth portfolios of an urban, out-of-school, and youth-serving makerspace in the eastern United States through a year-long qualitative study. he makerspace we worked with had a space-wide process whereby every youth had their own online portfolio. In this article, we focus on three youth who captured and shared their creative out-of-school work beyond the adult-initiated process. he three cases concretize diferent ways of documenting and allowed us to extract speciic motivators and mechanisms that could frame portfolio creation in other out-of-school settings as immediately purposeful and meaningful for youth. The maker movement and portfolios Internationally, educators have created informal networks of people interested in and supportive of learning through personally meaningful projects within workshops for exploratory tinkering with tools from looms to laser-cutters (Peppler & Bender, 2013). What many educators and researchers aligned with the maker movement agree on is the importance of the process of making, the possibility to run into challenges and untangle them into personally meaningful projects that 146 “My Portfolio Helps My Making” can be shared to enrich a community of makers (Peppler, Halverson, & Kafai, 2016). By sharing projects online, whether puppet shows or programmed animations, makers call for others to comment on their work; represent their processes, challenges, and approaches; and iterate on their work (Tseng, 2015a). he maker movement is closely aligned with the arts, from which portfolios emerged in the 1990s (Gardner, 1989). Since then, portfolios, and particularly electronic portfolios, have been talked about as promising ways to capture rich learning, improve instruction, and foster learning communities (Lamme & Hysmith, 1991). hrough tight coupling between standards and classroom practices, portfolios have been praised as assessment tools that might expand lattened test scores (Love, McKean, & Gathercoal, 2004). Beyond the K-12 education1, colleges and professional applications ask youth to share examples of their creative work related to disciplinary practice within or outside schools (Byrne & Davidson, 2015). Making out-of-school practices relevant for future opportunities promises to provide a wider audience with access to higher education and professional opportunities (Peppler, Maltese, Keune, Chang, & Regalla, 2015). hus, portfolios in out-of-school makerspaces are increasing their relevance. Speciically focused on making, sotware and hardware tools have been designed for capturing and sharing processes and projects. For example, Spin is a tool that allows youth to create revolving animated GIFs of their projects (Tseng, 2015b). However, it can be challenging for out-of-school makerspaces to implement consistent space-wide portfolio practices. In the low of making it can feel disruptive to pause and snap a photograph, especially if the photograph does not serve an immediate project purpose (Keune, Peppler, Chang, & Regalla, 2015). It is unclear what immediate purposes would motivate the capturing of making processes. To better understand youth motivations that could guide portfolio practices in out-of-school makerspaces, we took a sociocultural and situative approach to motivation (Nolen, Horn, & Ward, 2015). Unlike strictly cognitive approaches to motivation that focus on aspects of the learning environment that stimulate internal shits in individual understanding and skills, situative approaches of motivation are concerned with the meaning of particular social practices within the broader context of a learning environment (Nolen, Horn, & Ward, 147 Anna Keune, Naomi Thompson, Kylie Peppler & Stephanie Chang 2015). For example, rather than considering how photographs of a 3D-printing process communicate an individual’s knowledge of the disciplinary concepts of engineering, we focus on the underlying objectives that called the youth to snap and share the pictures in the irst place, potentially to explore, engage, and enrich social practices. Apart from understanding what drives youth to document, we are also curious about how technology might mediate and support particular motivations and sustained practice (Blumfeld et al., 1991). We refer to this as mechanisms that facilitate capturing and sharing. Introducing the Digital Harbor Foundation he Digital Harbor Foundation (DHF) is a youth-serving, out-of-school makerspace. he space ofers a diverse range of youth programs, including courses centered on 3D printing, constructing micro-controller musical instruments, soldering robotic creatures, and open-ended explorations. he long-standing history of portfolios in the space allowed us to observe how youth documentation takes place, and what motivates and facilitates the youth to create portfolios. he space has been facilitating portfolios since early 2014, and since then has continuously reined its portfolio practices in response to programs and youth needs. Every youth has a WordPress-based portfolio page with a unique URL, and all websites are linked to an umbrella page that displays the latest posts of each portfolio. Overall, the space-wide system presents an opportunity for the youth to document their out-of-school work in an open portfolio that grows with them. Over the course of a year, our engagement with DHF consisted of online observation of 22 youth portfolios and two ield site visits that included observations of youth documentation, and semi-structured portfolio walkthroughs with six youth whom the educators had identiied as having exceptional portfolios2. he portfolio walkthroughs combined a walkthrough approach from usability testing, in which designers click through their interactive interfaces while performing a typical task (Rieman, Franzke, & Redmiles, 1995), and (2) semi-structured interviews (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). During the walkthroughs, we asked the youth to open all the online documentation of their projects and to show examples of their work while we asked them questions about their documentation and making practices as well as their motivations 148 “My Portfolio Helps My Making” for capturing and sharing their work. Portfolio walkthroughs typically lasted 30 minutes, and were audio- and video recorded. We chose to dive into three youth portfolio cases in our analysis of motivators and mechanisms because these portfolios extended the adult-initiated process. Youth portfolio cases A portfolio for building an extended professional network Akida was most intrigued by electronics, coding, and Minecrat. Recently, he had created an interactive project in collaboration with staf and other youth: the makerspace donation box. his project involved the creation of a cube with red and blue laser-cut walls (Image 1). he front side had laser-engraved instructions that read: “Give a donation and get an instant thank you.” Below this, Akida’s name and the year of making were engraved. While the box seemed to have been cut and assembled with precision through anchoring the laser-cut pieces tightly together, it was in fact prototypically held together with masking tape. he sides of the boxes had carefully aligned holes similar to those found on speakers, so that sound could escape from the hidden electronics inside the box. Inside, microcontrollers were connected to speakers and programmed to play a recording of makerspace youth Image 1. Akida’s Donation box 149 Anna Keune, Naomi Thompson, Kylie Peppler & Stephanie Chang and staf members saying “thank you” when someone dropped coins into the box. he donation box was positioned on a small table next to the entrance of the makerspace. Although the donation box was one of his favorite projects, Akida did not document it on his makerspace portfolio. He planned to share the code for the project in the future, and the fact that the project was displayed and in use at the makerspace made it possible to go back and capture the work online. More importantly, the project was displayed along with other youth projects, including a cardboard sign with embedded LEDs that changed color depending on the hashtags posted to the social media feed of the makerspace. his project inspired the creation of a large light installation for the White House art festival SXSL (South by South Lawn) in 2016. Besides serving as inspiration for potentially larger projects, photographs of the donation box were oten shared on social media. For example, sharing a photograph of Akida presenting the donation box at a local manufacturing company made it possible for his work to be ampliied and to reach an audience outside the makerspace (see Image 2). Presenting work to audiences outside the makerspace can be a motivator for youth to preserve their projects. Displaying and using projects inside the makerspace was one mechanism for achieving this, while another was to provide opportunities for anyone to capture and share by encouraging visitors to post pictures for their online network. he interplay of online and oline sharing of youth work in the makerspace and beyond can create dynamic impacts on the way youth experience the possibilities of their projects. A portfolio for spinning of new projects based on old threads Alma was a high school senior at a STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics)-focused school, where she centered her academic interests on engineering. Her school activities difered from those at the makerspace, where she could engage engineering concepts through hands-on creative projects. he DHF required the youth to create a project combining the many skills and techniques they had learned, including circuitry and 3D printing. Alma created an installation that she titled “Wonderland 2.0” (Image 3). he installation consisted of blue 3D-printed mush- 150 “My Portfolio Helps My Making” Image 2. A social media post showing Akida presenting the donation box rooms that were positioned on a painted cardboard box and connected with copper tape and wires to a Makey Makey breakout board. Using sound-editing sotware, Alma coordinated eerie sounds to diferent wires and programmed the computer to play them when the mushrooms were touched. Incorporating diferent skills into the project, Alma constructed it one idea at a time, without knowing its inal shape or form when she started: Everything came together. As I irst set out in doing this, I would have never expected this to happen. (...) When I irst started I began 151 Anna Keune, Naomi Thompson, Kylie Peppler & Stephanie Chang Image 3. Alma’s installation “Alice in Wonderland 2.0”, combining the skills she learned at the makerspace with an idea of a mushroom, a table, and a setting created with a 3D printer. Once the sounds and the painting got in, the project grew and ideas started lowing. It was not planned from the start. In the low of making, Alma’s ideas emerged as she layered more and more skills onto the project while working toward her inal project. One example of layering prior skills was related to the stackability of the mushrooms. Similar to a birdhouse she had previously documented on her portfolio (Image 4), Alma had to consider the tolerance setting of the 3D printer she was using to create removable parts. Each of the printers at the makerspace was assembled and calibrated by hand, so it was important to know the settings of the printer in use while working on a project that required precision. Alma started documenting projects on her DHF website when she joined the makerspace. At designated times, she wrote periodic posts throughout the beginner’s course, addressing her audience through witty writing and usually including project photographs. hese allotted times presented checkpoints for Alma to remember to keep track of capturing the making in order to better serve the creation of her inal project: 152 “My Portfolio Helps My Making” Image 4. Screenshot of Alma’s birdhouse post I think [my portfolio] helps making. (…) It helps when you’re well on your way, you can always go back and remember what you did and what you may not remember in the present. Going back, you can get a fresh look on things, and that changes your perspective and that would also help your current making. For Alma, consistent documenting was a way to mindfully work toward completing her inal project. Jotting down notes online helped her plan ahead. Knowing that the posts would serve to inspire her next moves motivated Alma to document regularly. Prompts and speciically allotted timelines helped her capture her work easily; this portfolio creation became part of her creative low and facilitated idea spin-ofs. A portfolio for overcoming social apprehension Evan joined the makerspace hoping to overcome his shyness and learn to work more easily with others. At the makerspace he could move at 153 Anna Keune, Naomi Thompson, Kylie Peppler & Stephanie Chang his own pace, from working on personal projects alongside peers, which he called working “human-adjacent,” to contributing to collaborative projects in small groups. In this move to overcome his shyness, Evan’s portfolio played a strong role. Just how important the portfolio was to Evan can be seen in the sheer number of project posts he published online. Over the course of a year he published a total of 33 posts, the highest number in the makerspace. In nine of these posts, he relected on his social interactions with others. his was nearly triple the average of the other youths, suggesting that Evan was deliberately seeking to capture his progress in this area. One of the projects Evan highlighted for us as particularly interesting to him was part of a Zombie-centered design course, in which makerspace educators asked the youth to prototype a solution for escaping from zombies across a ravine. Evan created a pulley bridge out of cardboard and string (Image 5, let). He explained that it was challenging to make the bridge function and to plan for a clean, functional design. To show how the bridge would function, Evan shared a video on his portfolio that demoed his prototype (Image 6, right). He explained that he looked across the portfolio entries of other youth working alongside him and noticed that “there were diferent ways for people to get across the gorge.” he process ofered by the online portfolio infrastructure motivated Evan to relect on face-to-face and online social engagement. Another example of Evan’s social engagement at the makerspace was related to a Minecrat course, in which small groups of youth collaborated to build a small virtual town. Evan led one of the construction groups, coordinating the actions of his group members with other groups by moving in and out of the virtual space: When everyone had diferent pieces of the map, we had to do it twice, because the irst time things collapsed. But the second time it worked a lot better when people were forming groups. (...) It was the same when we built the inal colony in the inal project. Before we worked more organized, we elected leaders and worked in groups. But the irst day of building a colony a few people did random stuf and a leader (of another group) got distracted and (the joined) leadership was diicult to keep going. Once everyone decided to build in the same place, the group came together. 154 “My Portfolio Helps My Making” Image 5 & 6. Snapshot of Evan’s pulley bridge (let) and portfolio (right) Using the portfolio to relect on social engagements and capture strategies for successfully working with peers seemed to motivate Evan to continue documenting and sharing his work. he mechanism that made this possible was that he could choose how many posts he wanted to share about his engagement, and to follow this own progression through the chronological organization of his posts. Working with these projects and documenting his experiences led Evan to take on new challenges, such as presenting his work outside the makerspace in front of adults he had not previously met. Neither Evan nor the educators had imagined this possibility when he irst joined the makerspace. Discussion and conclusions All the cases explored in this article tell unique stories: Akida’s portfolio served to extend his professional network through combining online and oline sharing; Alma’s portfolio helped her spin of new projects based on old threads; and Evan used his portfolio to overcome social apprehension. Looking across the cases, we identiied important motivators and mechanisms in the creation of the three youths’ portfolios that could inform the establishment of portfolio practices in other out-of-school makerspaces. Table 1 summarizes these motivators and mechanisms. 155 Anna Keune, Naomi Thompson, Kylie Peppler & Stephanie Chang Table 1. Motivators and mechanisms of portfolios at the Digital Harbor Foundation Motivators Connecting to authentic audiences Mechanisms • • Taking ownership over portfolios • • • Working toward a final project • • Provide physical and online spaces for sharing projects. Encourage visitors to capture and share youth projects. Ofer choice over how and where to document and share. Make customization features available. Encourage use of existing tools and support multiple spaces. Make it known to youth that small projects can build toward final projects. Allot time for documenting and browsing portfolios. Comparing project solutions • • Initiate a space-wide portfolio system. Encourage sharing portfolio posts among youth. Encouraging following passions and elaborating interests • • Be flexible about number of posts. Provide opportunities for shiting between personal and shared projects. Give space to track progress over time. • he three cases show how possibilities arise as youth are given the space and resources for making and for taking ownership of documenting and sharing their work. his way, portfolios are not simply a requirement set by adults, but a way to share with peers, follow passions, and elaborate interests. heir portfolios allowed these three youth to share their projects on their own terms, in their own ways, and on their own time. At the DHF, adult-driven portfolio practices ignited and spread documentation throughout the makerspace. All the portfolios presented in this article took the adult-driven portfolio process and turned it into an adult-initiated process that was lexible enough for the youth Anna Keune, Doctoral Student, Department of Learning Sciences, Indiana University, USA, akeune@indiana.edu Naomi Thompson, Doctoral Student , Department of Learning Sciences, Indiana University, USA, naothomp@indiana.edu Kylie Peppler, Associate Professor, Department of Learning Sciences, Indiana University, USA, kpeppler@indiana.edu Stephanie Chang, Director of Programs , Maker Ed (Non-profit organization), USA, stephanie@makered.org 156 “My Portfolio Helps My Making” to adapt to their personal purposes and needs. For example, they were motivated by the ability to follow their passions and elaborate their interests through a lexible number of required posts, opportunities to shit between personal and collaborative projects, and visual tools for seeing their personal development. he youth connected to authentic audiences who were genuinely interested in their projects presented outside the makerspace, and found their projects being shared on social media by visitors. his speaks to the importance of providing opportunities for youth to engage communities with specialized interests within the safe conines of the out-of-school makerspace. Treated in these ways, portfolios can become tools for uncovering interests and possibilities for future opportunities and community memberships. he youth were motivated by taking ownership over their portfolios, which was encouraged by giving them the power to make choices about aesthetics as well as location(s) in the matter of how and where their work would be viewed by others. he immediate usefulness of the portfolios was also perceived when the youth were allowed to use their portfolios to work toward a inal project; for example, when the makerspace provided time and space for documenting and browsing portfolios. Viewing projects and portfolios could inspire comparing project solutions, new ideas or ways in which challenges could be overcome. While youth are creating projects in makerspaces, preparing for college or future jobs might be a far-away goal; however, these cases show that the social context of portfolios – creating and sharing work within and outside local learning spaces – may be more immediately useful and personally relevant for youth and serve as a driver to continue documenting. hrough diverse tools, the youth took ownership over the process of capturing and sharing their work, and beyond this, took ownership of their future making opportunities and possibilities. Acknowledgement his work was part of the Open Portfolio Project, a research initiative concerned with the use of open and decentralized portfolio systems as tools for lifelong learning and assessment, funded by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. We thank the youth and educators of the Digital Harbor Foundation for their participation and contribution. 157 Anna Keune, Naomi Thompson, Kylie Peppler & Stephanie Chang Note 1. 2. he expression is a shortening of kindergarten (K) for 4- to 6-year-olds through twelth grade (12) for 17- to 19-year-olds. More information about the Open Portfolio Project: http://makered.org/opp/ References Blumenfeld, Phyllis; Soloway, Elliot; Marx, Ronald; Krajcik, Joseph; Guzdial, Mark & Palincsar, Annemarie (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational psychologist, 26(3-4): 369-398. Byrne, Daragh & Davidson, Catherine (2015). MakeSchools Higher Education Alliance: State of Making Report. Retrieved from http://make.xsead.cmu.edu/week_of_making/report Gardner, Howard (1989). Zero-based Arts Education: An introduction to ARTS PROPEL. Studies in Art Education, 71-83. Keune, Anna; Peppler, Kylie; Chang, Stephanie & Regalla, Lisa (2015). A networked vision for sharing and documenting. Maker Education Initiative. December, 2015. Lamme, Linda & Hysmith, Cecilia (1991). One school’s adventure into portfolio assessment. Language Arts, 68(8): 629-640. Love, Douglas; Gathercoal, Paul & McKean, Gerry (2004). Portfolios to webfolios and beyond: Levels of maturation. Educause Quarterly, 27(2): 24-38. Merriam, Sharan & Tisdell, Elizabeth (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons. Niguidula, David (1993). he Digital Portfolio: A Richer Picture of Student Performance. Studies on Exhibitions (13). Nolen, Susan; Horn, Ilana & Ward, Christopher J. (2015). Situating motivation. Educational Psychologist, 50(3): 234-247. Peppler, Kylie & Bender, Sophia (2013). Maker movement spreads innovation one project at a time. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(3): 22-27. Peppler, Kylie; Maltese, Adam; Keune, Anna; Chang, Stephanie & Regalla, Lisa (2015). he Maker Ed Open Portfolio Project: Survey of Makerspaces Part 2. Maker Education Initiative. Accessed December, 2015. Peppler, Kylie; Halverson, Erica & Kafai, Yasmin (Eds.). (2016). Makeology: Makerspaces as Learning Environments (Vol. 1). New York: Routledge. Riconscente, Michelle (2000). Digital Portfolios: An Enduring Promise for Enhancing Assessment. New York, NY: Center for Children and Technology. Rieman, John; Franzke, Marita & Redmiles, David (1995, May). Usability evaluation with the cognitive walkthrough. Paper presented at the conference Companion on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 7-11 May 1995, at Denver, Colorado, USA. Tseng, Tifany (2015a). Making make-throughs: Supporting young makers sharing design process. Paper presented at the conference Fablearn, 26-27 August, at Stanford University, USA. Tseng, Tifany (2015b). Spin: A photography turntable system for creating animated documentation. Paper presented at the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, 21-25 June 2015, at Medford, Massachusetts, USA. 158 13 Pockets of Freedom, but Mostly Constraints Emerging Trends in Children’s DIY Media Platforms Deborah A. Fields & Sara M. Grimes he spread of “web 2.0” and WYSIWYG (“what-you-see-is-whatyou-get”) content creation tools has led to a massive increase in user-generated content across the connected digital landscape. According to a survey conducted by YouTube and Ipsos Reid, over 90 per cent of online “millennials” create content at least once a month (YouTube, 2014). From citizen journalism to personal “vlogs,” producing do-ityourself (DIY) media has become a key component of many young people’s digital experience. One of the most important aspects of this phenomenon is how it expands even younger children’s access to “mass” media production and distribution. Whereas child-made media was once relegated to refrigerator doors and classroom bulletin boards, it can now be published online. From an educational perspective, this shit has the potential to open up numerous social learning practices that build on long-acknowledged aspects of learning (e.g. Buckingham, 2009; Vygotsky, 2004). From a rights perspective, increased participation in media making has important implications for children’s cultural rights and potential rights as authors, artists and performers. At the same time, designing DIY media platforms for children is situated at the crossroads of a number of challenging – and otentimes competing – social expectations and T 159 Fields, Deborah A. & Grimes, Sara M. (2017). Pockets of Freedom, but Mostly Constraints. Emerging Trends in Children’s DIY Media Platforms in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Deborah A. Fields & Sara M. Grimes controversies. hese include geographically bound regulatory requirements (Grimes, 2013), commercial inluences, parental concerns, digital divides, and emerging “hierarchies of access” (Grimes & Fields, 2012). he Kids DIY Media Partnership seeks to identify the types of support systems – regulatory, infrastructural, and technical – that most efectively and sustainably foster a rights-based, inclusive, child-centric approach to addressing children’s cultural participation online. he irst stage1 of this project consisted of a media scan aimed at identifying websites describing themselves as having a focus on DIY media, that were determined to be targeted to children or otherwise child-inclusive (for a few examples see Images 1-4)2. he sites identiied through this scan were then subjected to two forms of content analysis: irst a broad analysis of their graphic user interface (GUI) designs (herein referred to as “designs”) and texts, and second a review of their privacy policies and terms of service documents. he third stage consisted of two workshops that brought together designers, educators, researchers, and children’s media policy advocates to discuss some of the challenges and issues associated with children’s DIY media creation and sharing. Drawing on the indings and discussion of the research above, in this chapter we argue that children’s freedom of expression is constrained within the online DIY media landscape in three main ways: the low Image 1. Tate Kids homepage (partial view). Users create art and games, and browse ideas from the Tate Museum. 160 Pockets of Freedom, but Mostly Constraints Image 2. Scratch.mit.edu homepage (partial view). Users share their computer programming creations as well as browse other users’ work. The homepage on Scratch is dominated by user-generated content. Image 3. Storybird.com homepage (partial view). Users write and share stories by assembling professionally created illustrations. Image 4. DIY.org homepage (partial view). Users share a wide range of things they have made both digitally and physically. 161 Deborah A. Fields & Sara M. Grimes availability of sites where children can lawfully share their DIY media creations; the limited design features for sharing and creating found on these sites that are available to children; and the absence of adequate guidelines and policies prioritizing children’s freedom of expression currently available to designers. Literature review Previous academic research on children’s digital media making has been limited in many ways. For one, large surveys of Internet use tend to exclude children entirely, focusing instead on teens and young adults. Important exceptions to this include works associated with the EU Kids Online project (Livingstone, 2008), longitudinal research conducted as part of the Young Canadians in a Wired World project (Steeves, 2014), and research by Svoen (2007). Even here, younger children aged 0 to 8 years are absent from most available data sets. While a growing number of qualitative studies examine the experiences of younger children creating and sharing content online (e.g. Burn & Richards, 2014; Willett et al., 2013), it remains an underexplored area of research. Among recent studies that do attend to children’s DIY media production, there is a tendency to focus on classroom contexts, and most do not explicitly consider children’s sharing of their creations (for an exception to this, see Fields, Kafai & Giang, 2016). Instead, sharing behavior is implied instead of described, or simply noted as a potential implication of creative production (e.g. Kearney, 2007). As with other aspects of children’s digital technology use, few (if any) previous studies consider the overall scope and quality of the available spaces, tools and platforms for children’s DIY media making, especially with consideration for how larger policy inluences might shape these designs. To date, much of the scholarship on children’s online spaces has focused on single websites, some of which were developed under highly unique circumstances – such as at a university (e.g. Scratch), or through a special funding initiative (e.g. YouMedia). Similar trends can be found in the literature on children’s games, apps and other digital technologies (e.g. Rafalow & Salen Tekinbas, 2014; Bailey, 2016) – leaving a dearth of comprehensive and comparative research to draw on. hese gaps in our understanding are problematic, as we cannot assume that trends exhibited by teens and young adults will hold for 162 Pockets of Freedom, but Mostly Constraints children, or that the features found on one site are universal. his is especially the case when we consider not only the vast diferences in development experienced between the preschool and teenage years, but also diferences in family structures and supervision of online activities. For instance, even among users of similar ages, sharing behaviors can difer substantially (e.g. Svoen, 2007). Concurrently, however, emerging research suggests that increased participation in media making and sharing can provide children with a myriad of valuable opportunities from giving and receiving constructive criticism (e.g. Black, 2008), to public and civic engagement (e.g. Bennett, 2007), to exercising one’s communication rights (e.g. Coombe, 2010). Furthermore, the spread of child-created content has the potential to make media as a whole more diverse and democratic, through the inclusion of the voices, ideas and perspectives of a group that has until recently been largely excluded from directly contributing its content (Grimes & Fields, 2015). The kids DIY media online landscape he irst step in our research was to map out the scope and shape of online DIY media platforms available to children under the age of 13 years. A media scan was conducted with the goal of identifying all available English-language websites where children could make and share media content they themselves had created, remixed or heavily customized. While our search yielded a handful of intergenerational websites previously known to include child users, we largely focused on those that described themselves as, or otherwise indicated that they were, targeted speciically to youth, kids and/or children. he scan was completed over a four-month period in 2013-2014 by researchers located in diferent geographic regions using multiple search engines (e.g. Google, Bing) and search terms (e.g. “DIY media,” “stories by kids,” “children’s music websites”). he media scan produced several unexpected indings. First, we were surprised by the relatively small number of sites it yielded. Our preliminary data set counted in the low hundreds, and was further reduced once we eliminated sites that claimed to be for children (e.g. in their self-descriptions) but contained terms of use or privacy policies that forbade children under the age of 13 from participating. Second, relatively few DIY media sites for children contained sharing 163 Deborah A. Fields & Sara M. Grimes features. A signiicant number of our early search results contained tools or resources for creating media, but did not provide any features or systems for sharing this media with others. During the early stages of coding, 107 sites – nearly half the sites in our preliminary data set – were eliminated for failing to include built-in sharing features, despite containing descriptions or other indications that such features would be provided. In terms of major trends within the online children’s DIY media landscape, “making” clearly trumped “making and sharing.” Ultimately, our media scan identiied only 140 websites that allowed children under the age of 13 to both make and share their own media content (Grimes & Fields, 2015). What do kids DIY media sites look like? he content of 120 of the sites identiied in the media scan was subsequently analyzed using a standardized, 83-item coding protocol. he content analysis did not extend to content made or posted by the sites’ users, but instead focused solely on content created by the sites’ owners/operators, including features of the sites’ designs, descriptive texts (e.g. About Us pages, instructions), advertisements, terms of service, and privacy policies. While a comprehensive overview of the content analysis indings is beyond the scope of this chapter, a discussion of dominant trends can be useful for understanding what the children’s online DIY media environment looked like in 2014 (see Table 1 for layout of results discussed below). As this was a criterion for inclusion, all the sites examined provided tools, features and/or forums for users to either make or upload some form of DIY or user-generated content, which could then be shared with either the public or other registered users. he vast majority enabled on-site sharing, while another signiicant proportion enabled users to share through third-party sites such as Facebook. We examined the extent to which user creations were included in the construction of the site’s public face or “front page,” and found that most, seven out of ten, showcased their users in some way. he most popular means of showing user involvement on the front page was by displaying users’ shared content, their DIY media creations. Another key consideration was the extent to which children’s content was moderated, censored or otherwise restricted on the sites. 164 Pockets of Freedom, but Mostly Constraints Table 1. Qualities of Kids DIY Media Websites (per cent) Supports for sharing user-generated content % On-site sharing 96 Sharing in third-party sites 68 Visibility of users on front page Showcase users on front page 74 Showcase users’ creations on front-page 65 Moderation Moderate users’ content before posting 19 Site moderates content of users’ communication 26 Instructions to report unacceptable content 65 Networking residues Commenting 80 Liking/favoriting/rating 68 Private messaging 48 Text chat 16 Curate projects in a gallery or list 49 Finding and following other users Friend users 37 Follow users 52 Search for other users 56 Support for creating content Support for creation within the site 55 User forums 44 Expert support 22 User-generated tutorials 17 No support from site 45 N=120 Note: Sites provided multiple features wich is why the sum within each category is exceeds 100. Source: Compiled by the authors Notably, only a ith of the sites analyzed moderated user content before it was posted, while less than a third monitored users’ contributions to on-site forums, comment sections, and other communication channels. Support for various forms of peer moderation was more prevalent: 65 per cent of the sites instructed users to “report” unacceptable or ofensive content. It is important to note that the content analysis did not extend to the sites’ own creation tools, which may very well have contained design limitations that restricted users at the 165 Deborah A. Fields & Sara M. Grimes point of creation (including banned words ilters, missing features, or reduced menu options). Creation does not happen in a vacuum: many supports, both technical and social, are needed to help children develop the skills and understanding to be creative in a particular area, as well as to cultivate the conditions in which a shared cultural experience might emerge. As such, we also examined the ways, and the extent to which, the sites fostered community and allowed for users to provide one another with peer support. Eight out of ten sites did provide users with features allowing them to leave (public) comments on other users’ projects. Many also enabled users to “like,” “favorite” or otherwise rate each other’s creations. Other forms of communication were less common. Less than half the sites ofered private messaging or text chat features, and less than half enabled users to curate projects to a public list or gallery. In terms of friending and following, just over half the sites allowed members to friend, follow or search for other users. Many of the sites provided means of creative support from within their own communities, but most did this through the inclusion of user forums – a feature that previous research has found to often be used by only a small proportion of core users (e.g. Kafai & Fields, 2013). In addition, some sites were designed for other means of community support such as expert support and user-generated tutorials. However, at nearly half the sites analyzed, there were no places explicitly designed for users to ind help from each other. Overall, we found that some children’s DIY media sites do provide a range of technical and social supports for younger users to engage in media making and sharing, but also that this is far from consistent or even pervasive. Although most of the sites showcased user content on their front pages, thereby including children’s voices in the construction of the site’s “public face,” tools for socializing, networking, and providing peer support were sparse and limited. An unexpected inding was the lack of identiiable moderation policies found on so many of the sites. While this could potentially have beneicial implications for children’s freedom of speech rights, it also raises serious questions about compliance with the US Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) and the status of children’s privacy, safety and well-being within the DIY media realm. 166 Pockets of Freedom, but Mostly Constraints Navigating a complex terrain Since the partnership was launched in 2013 we have hosted two workshops, bringing together project partners with established children’s media producers and designers, educators, policy experts, and academic researchers. hese workshops have presented a unique opportunity to share and receive feedback on our preliminary indings, and discuss relevant issues with a cross-sector group of key stakeholders. he irst workshop was held in early 2014, included 22 participants (along with 8 members of the research team), and focused on the theme “sharing.” he second was held in early 2016, included 18 participants (in addition to 11 members of the research team), and centered on the theme “agency.” An important set of issues brought up by our participants concerned the legal requirements, regulatory protections, and costs associated with maintaining a DIY media platform for children online. Some reported that designers oten choose to exclude children (through the inclusion of formal age restrictions, for instance) because of governmental regulations on collecting data from users under the age of 13, particularly those established by COPPA. If companies do target users under 13, they risk opening themselves up to potential litigation and civil penalties. he challenges involved in moderating online content and communication in order to make sites “safe” for children were raised as a related concern. Efective moderation requires people who can review all content and comments, which necessitates a signiicant investment of time and money. In both cases, money spent on legal fees or moderator salaries was described as detracting investment from the sites themselves – for making them better, expanding their features, and so on. Participants discussed the implications these legal and moderation concerns had on the kinds and quality of digital media available to children. Another issue raised by our workshop participants was the perceived lack of resources available to help designers navigate regulatory requirements, as well as evaluate and apply appropriate ethical standards to the design and management of children’s online DIY media spaces. Some of our participants suggested that placing strict limits on certain words, themes or images was an unavoidable part of hosting a space where children post and view user-made content, but they also acknowledged that deining these limits was sometimes diicult. his discussion shited to the lack of appropriate standards and guidelines to 167 Deborah A. Fields & Sara M. Grimes refer to when making such decisions. Relatedly, participants discussed tensions around the privacy policies and terms of service contracts contained within children’s websites, games and apps, specifically those that arose when the desire to ensure that children (and parents) understood the policies conlicted with the various legal requirements associated with such documents. Some reported that although they had wanted to include child-friendly language about privacy, intellectual property ownership and other terms of service in their policies, their legal departments had ultimately nixed these plans, opting instead for standard, legalese-laden documents. Our participants also expressed concerns about younger children’s access to adequate information on the implications of posting content online. A number of them proposed that at least some of the problems we discussed might be addressed through digital literacy curricula speciically aimed at teaching younger users about their rights and responsibilities as content creators. Others mentioned that many parents and educators also lack a irm understanding of the various issues involved, and did not have the adequate resources to efectively guide their children through complex copyright and privacy issues. his led to some concerns about the ability of both children and parents to make informed decisions about the legal relationships they enter online, as well as some preliminary questions about how digital literacy can be addressed in, or perhaps even built into, privacy policy and terms of service documents. he discussions that unfolded during these workshops thus provided additional context for understanding the indings of our media scan and content analysis, while introducing some contradictions as well. On the one hand, the participants revealed some of the probable reasons behind the paucity of sites available to children for creating and sharing their own DIY media content, highlighting the various challenges that designers face at various points in the development process, as well as the lack of adequate support available to them when it comes to tackling the emerging ethical and legal issues involved. On the other hand, our indings suggest that not all sites are equally limited by the types of considerations raised by our workshop participants – at least not in ways discernable through our content analysis. For instance, very few of the sites we examined appeared to moderate or review user-made content. As mentioned, this raises important questions about the rates 168 Pockets of Freedom, but Mostly Constraints of COPPA compliance found in this area of the children’s digital landscape, as well as the implications for children’s freedom of expression and other cultural rights. It also raises new questions about how and where regulatory requirements and industry standards relating to the publication of children’s content might both overlap and conlict. Conclusion and next steps Overall, the indings of our media scan and content analysis show that many sites did not suiciently aford or support users’ sharing content with the public or sharing ideas with other creators. his trend is concerning, since sharing and interacting with others play such an instrumental role in many of the beneits associated with media making. It is important to note, however, that our research also identiied a number of promising exceptions to the dominant trends identiied above. his included a site that incorporated creative commons licensing and a site that provided detailed editorial feedback on all user-created submissions, as well as a handful of sites featuring peer mentoring tools and support systems. While these exceptions were not discussed in this chapter, they do form the basis of the next planned step in our research – a series of in-depth case studies aimed at better understanding the workings, rationale and uses of sites (as well as digital games and apps) found to contain particularly noteworthy, child-centric, and ethical approaches to supporting children’s DIY media making and sharing. he indings described here have informed our research in other ways as well. Key among them are the contradictory indings that emerged around issues of content moderation, COPPA compliance, and children’s freedom of expression rights. Previous research suggests that many web 2.0 platforms opt to ban children under the age of 13 in order to avoid the costs and potential challenges associated with moderating children’s content and ensuring COPPA compliance. Many of our workshop participants conirmed that this was oten the case, and some related anecdotes about projects or features that were ultimately discontinued on these very grounds. Our media scan results appear to support this inding; however, our content analysis results do not. he discrepancy raises a number of questions: Does the lack of on-site moderation observed among these sites translate into greater freedoms for children to express themselves and be creative? Or are these trends 169 Deborah A. Fields & Sara M. Grimes evidence of a lack of accountability and responsibility on behalf of the site creators? Or, were our results skewed by the limited scope of our coding protocol, or alternatively, by a lack of transparency about underlying content moderation and censorship practices? On these and other issues, our indings have raised more questions than answers. his is especially the case when it comes to thinking about why children’s DIY media sites are designed the way they are, and what the implications are for children’s creativity, learning and cultural rights. In addition to justifying the need to conduct an in-depth comparative case study, our indings to date inform some of the questions we will be asking in our upcoming interviews with children’s DIY media site designers. We are also drawing on these indings, particularly the issues and questions that emerged during our workshops, in our planning of a daylong consultation event with a select group of child media makers, to be held in the inal year of the Kids DIY Media Partnership. While there is still much work to be done, we anticipate that at the project’s end our study will yield a rich and detailed mapping of the contemporary children’s DIY media landscape, and provide a set of recommendations for building and managing child-centric, ethical and rights-based platforms, policies and approaches for supporting children’s media making and sharing online. Notes 1. 2. Additional research stages associated with this project include a transnational policy analysis and a series of in-depth case studies, both of which are currently underway. Once the data from these stages have been analyzed, we furthermore plan to hold a daylong “child advisory” event, which will bring together Kids DIY Media partners and child creators to discuss the implications of our indings, and establish a series of next steps and priority areas. he sites covered a broad range of media, from writing and art to game-making and science. A few examples are Scratch.mit.edu, storybird.com, youtube.com, diy. org, roblox.com, gamestarmechanic.com, and kids.tate.org.uk. Deborah A. Fields, Temporary Assistant Professor, Instructional Technologies and Learning Sciences, Utah State University, USA, deborah.fields@usu.edu Sara M. Grimes, Associate Professor, Faculty of Information, University of Toronto, Canada, sara.grimes@utoronto.ca 170 Pockets of Freedom, but Mostly Constraints References Bailey, Chris (2016). Free the Sheep: Improvised Song and Performance in and around a Minecrat Community. Literacy 50(2): 62-71. Bennett, W. Lance (ed.) (2007). Civic Life Online: Learning How Digital Media Can Engage Youth. he MIT Press: Cambridge, MA. Black, Rebecca. W. (2008). Adolescents and Online Fan Fiction. Peter Lang: New York. Buckingham, David. (2009). Skate Perception: Self-Representation, Identity and Visual Style in a Youth Subculture, pp. 133-151 in D. Buckingham & R. Willett (eds.), Video Cultures: Media Technology and Everyday Creativity. Palgrave Macmillan: New York. Burn, Andrew & Richards, Christopher Owen (eds.) (2014). Children’s Games in the New Media Age: Childlore, Media and the Playground. Farnham: Ashgate. Coombe, Rosemary J. (2010). Honing a Critical Cultural Study of Human Rights, Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 7(3): 230-246. Fields, Deborah A., Kafai, Yasmin B., & Giang, Michael T. (2016). Participation by Choice: A Transitional Analysis of Patterns in Social Networking and Coding Contributions in the Online Scratch Community, pp. 209-240 in U. Cress, H. Jeong, & J. Moskaliuk (eds.) Mass Collaboration and Education. New York, NY: Springer. Grimes, Sara M. (2013). Persistent and Emerging Questions about the Use of Terms of Service Contracts in Children’s Digital Media Sites and Platforms. University of British Columbia Law Review 46(3), 681-736. Grimes, Sara M. & Fields, Deborah A. (2012). Kids Online: A New Research Agenda for Understanding Social Networking Forums. New York. he Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop. Available at <http://www.joanganzcooneycenter.org/ reports-38.html> [Accessed 1 June, 2016]. Grimes, Sara M. & Fields, Deborah A. (2015). Children’s Media Making, but not Sharing: he Potential and Limitations of Child-speciic DIY Media Websites for a More Inclusive Media Landscape. Media International Australia, 154: 112-122. Kafai, Yasmin B. & Fields, Deborah A. (2013). Connected Play: Tweens in a Virtual World. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Kearney, Mary Celeste (2007). Productive Spaces: Girls’ Bedrooms as Sites of Cultural Production, Journal of Children and Media, 1(2): 126-141. Livingstone, Sonia (2008). Taking Risky Opportunities in Youthful Content Creation: Teenagers’ Use of Social Networking Sites for Intimacy, Privacy and Self-Expression. New Media & Society, 10(3): 393-411. Rafalow, M. H., & Salen Tekinbaş, Katie (2014). Welcome to Sackboy Planet: Connected Learning Among LittleBigPlanet 2. Digital Media and Learning Research Hub, Irvine, CA. Steeves, Valerie (2014). Canadians in a Wired World, Phase III: Experts or Amateurs? Gauging Young Canadians’ Digital Literacy Skills. Ottawa: Media Awareness Network. Svoen, Brit (2007). Consumers, Participants, and Creators: Young People’s Diverse Use of Television and New Media. Computers in Entertainment (CIE), 5(2): 1-16. Willett, Rebekah, Chris Richards, Jackie Marsh, Andrew Burn, and Julia C. Bishop. (2013). Children, Media and Playground Cultures: Ethnographic Studies of School Playtimes. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Vygotsky, Lev S. (2004). Imagination and Creativity in Childhood. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 42(1): 7-97. YouTube, Inc. (2014, January). he Power of Gen C. Report. Statista. Available at < https:// www.thinkwithgoogle.com/articles/the-power-of-gen-c-connecting-with-yourbest-customers.html> [Accessed: 9 January, 2017]. 171 14 Peer Teaching and Learning A Case of Two Five-year-olds as Minecraft Creators1 Sara Sintonen, Maj-Britt Kentz & Lasse Lipponen inecrat is a highly interesting form of the digital culture of our time. Oakley (2014) speaks of Minecrat as a sandbox, because just like in a sandbox, Minecrat players create the game world themselves while building content in it (Banks & Potts, 2010). While the Minecrat world could be researched from the perspective of play, we became more interested in looking at it as a pedagogical phenomenon and creative production that encourages peer learning from the perspectives of both learning and teaching. In our research on Minecrat creation by two Finnish ive-year-old children, our attention was strongly drawn to their spontaneous pedagogical activities: peer learning and teaching. We were amazed at how two ive-year-olds were capable of acting in a self-directed manner, teaching each other, working together to solve rather complex challenges arising from the Minecrat environment, and building a cohesive and intensive session in collaboration. M Minecrat as a digital environment for children Minecrat is oten characterized as a (game) world without any rules, storyline, or predeined objectives (Bebbington & Vellino, 2015). Its desktop version (PC/Mac) has ive game modes, each of which has clearly deined rules. Creative mode, the freest of the ive, allows for endless construction, collection and peaceful living. In contrast, in the Survival, Adventure, Spectator and Hardcore modes, the boundary 173 Sintonen, Sara, Kentz, Maj-Britt & Lipponen, Lasse (2017). Peer Teaching and Learning. A Case of Two Five-year-olds as Minecrat Creators in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Sara Sintonen, Maj-Britt Kentz & Lasse Lipponen conditions are clearly deined (Koutsouras et al. 2016). Weapons, potions, protective gear, and traps used in diferent modes also have clear instructions: what kinds and amounts of construction or raw materials are needed, and the order in which the construction and preparation can progress. Following the guidelines also requires precise knowledge of the location of the necessary materials, as well as the courage and skill to acquire them. For example, before you can prepare a healing potion (vs a harming one), you will irst need to crat a brewing stand, a cauldron and a glass bottle (Milton, 2014). Playing Minecrat on a server brings a collaborative multiplayer dimension to the game (PVP, person versus person). Any user can choose to set up a Minecrat server and, as administrator, deine the rules on their platform (for example, they might choose to authorize or disable the option for live team playing), which further elicits the players’ creativity. he multiplayer genre is closely linked to sharing game sessions and following them on YouTube channels. YouTube ofers Minecrat enthusiasts game instructions and solutions for survival, and also new ideas for creating and building their own game culture. he vocabulary used in YouTube’s Minecrat videos relects the fact that Finnish players generally prefer to use English as their interface language. he transparency and lexibility of Minecrat has prompted players to create complex worlds, amazing works of art, and performances (Duncan, 2011). Minecrat is currently one of the bestselling PC games in the world, making it a point of interest for many researchers from different academic disciplines. Globally, it is also one of the digital brands best known to pre-school and primary-school aged children (Chaudron et al. 2015; Noppari, 2014). In the context of learning, Minecrat and its environment have been studied in terms of the development of teenagers’ information literacy (Bebbington & Vellino, 2015), as a learning environment that relects and supports high school students’ creativity in literature studies (Cipollone et al. 2014) and inspires the production of art, develops students’ collaborative planning (Wu, 2016), and promotes social learning (Banks & Potts, 2010). hese researchers seem to have focused on looking at Minecrat as a tool for achieving a certain learning objective. 174 Peer Teaching and Learning Collaborative activities in digital environments and the basis for peer learning Many environments of digital culture are community platforms. Bruns (2008), for example, speaks of produsage, whereby an open and wide-ranging community of participants is an active producer of content that is continually modiiable and developable. Such environments promote peer learning: Minecrat encourages users to be creative and supportive of each other, and in doing so, support peer learning (Wernholm & Vigmo, 2015). Peer learning is typically deined as an event in which the learner serves as a teacher to his or her peers and the community works together to solve a problem (Fawcett & Garton, 2005). We approach peer learning through a socio-cultural frame of reference with Vygotskian roots (Greeno, 1997; Säljö, 2001). From this perspective, learning irst and foremost entails an involvement in activities by a set community. Knowhow is seen as communal, a practical skill of doing and acting. In participation, knowledge is created from and mediated through the variety of perspectives of the participating actors. People learn to use the tools of thought and action, and especially those of the communities they take part in. In addition to participation, the socio-cultural learning framework emphasizes the importance of tools in human action (Säljö, 2001; Vygotsky, 1978). Peer learning is deined here as learning from others, including the teaching aspect, on the one hand, and communal learning as a mutual, shared process on the other. In young children, peer learning is oten studied from the perspective of what children learn about themselves and their own abilities in relationships with others of their own age, with the peer group acting as a model for thinking and behaviour (Bandura, 1997). In light of this material, peer learning is based on teaching each other. It is manifested as mutual negotiation and the search for a solution born out of the creative process. From peer learning to mutual knowledge-building he focus of this article is an analysis of the shared Minecrat creation activity of two ive-year olds from the perspective of peer teaching and learning. Our qualitative data consist of a video recorded session (22:13 minutes), which represents peer learning and teaching, as well 175 Sara Sintonen, Maj-Britt Kentz & Lasse Lipponen as the players’ Minecrat competence and ability to perform sovereign actions in digital environments. Our data show children who are competent in their own digital cultures communicate in a way that can be characterized as an expert interaction, through teaching and learning. he video data were collected in an environment that was natural for both ive-year-olds in the study. Both players were in their own homes, using laptops and communicating at the same time via FaceTime on mobile devices (iPads). hey themselves had come up with the idea for this technological setting for sharing their game. Image 1. One of the players showing the screen to the other player through FaceTime. We will now consider the ive-year-olds’ digital creation in Minecrat through ive episodes. hese episodes represent the nature and quality of the intersubjective, shared idea and understanding the players have, and show how they engage in a participatory and collaborative social teaching and learning context. he game session (22:13 min) is divided into two clear subsets. Most of the irst ten minutes (9:26 min) covers the use of the EMC (energy matter currency) generator. he session continues with a focus on building a versatile and powerful tool for Minecrat (the morning star). It is 176 Peer Teaching and Learning worth noting that the players, Topi and Mikael, do not see each other playing in real time, except when their communication is mediated via the iPad. In other words, the two create in ‘diferent worlds’, and do not play side by side during this session. During the irst part of the session, Topi’s primary role is to advise and explain the EMC generator’s operating principles and beneits, as the tool is new to Mikael. he two friends’ comments are distributed fairly evenly, with Mikael slightly more active (61 comments) in his role as the primary learner than Topi (53). Since the boys are working separately, Topi (for whom the EMC generator is already a familiar tool), has the ability to do other things on his own, like looking ater his bee farm. hus, in addition to explaining the use of the EMC generator and advising, explaining, and justifying his choices, Topi himself has an opportunity to experiment and learn new things. In this irst part of the session, the cooperation between the boys starts easily and naturally. hey work on the EMC challenge for ten minutes, but to begin, only one direct question from Mikael and one straight answer from Topi are required. he rest of Topi’s EMC responses (15) are explanatory, specifying and justifying, and also include questions guiding Mikael’s progress and comments supporting his choices, such as ‘Yes’, ‘So’ and ‘Okay’ (10). Mikael’s role as a learner manifests itself in the discussion in a variety of ways. He explains his actions quite richly from a pedagogical point of view. He asks Topi for clariication six (6) times, expresses his understanding of the instructions/advice (3) and his acceptance of and compliance with the instructions given (7), and slows Topi’s pace down once (1). Mikael justiies his solutions and choices relating to the construction phases (8), and explains and shares his achievements (13). Although Mikael is immersed in his work, he follows (5) what Topi is doing the whole time and comments briely, for instance saying ‘Okay’ and ‘Yep’. In Mikael’s case, our attention turned to his relective speech, which also acts to guide his own actions when faced with new things (12). he role of learner prompts Mikael (4) to also thank Topi and express his enjoyment: ‘hanks for telling me that, that it’s this I mean, it’s so cool that I can copy these now…’ 177 Sara Sintonen, Maj-Britt Kentz & Lasse Lipponen he second half of the session also starts very spontaneously. Mikael has just managed to get the EMC generator to work and grasped the principle of ‘duplication’, although complete success still requires some ine tuning, and at the same time the phone rings at Topi’s and he leaves to report this to an adult. Mikael continues ine tuning and Topi returns. Topi begins to persuade Mikael to pursue new challenges, asking ‘You know Morning Star?’. he second half of the session, therefore, focuses on the construction of the Morning Star. As the tool is new to Topi as well, he starts learning by doing, meaning that he begins to build while explaining the building process at the same time. he work becomes less synchronized, as Mikael was not prepared for the change, and it takes him a while to gather the necessary materials and working space. During the session Topi himself becomes a learner, trying his best to igure out how the morning star can be constructed. he players gather dark matter, duplicate it their own, and take turns counting how many stacks (=64) of red matter the EMC generator has produced.2 As the gaming session progresses, the vocabulary they use becomes more professional and incorporates more English terms mixed into the Finnish. Although the setup of the activity changes (both players are now learners), the narration shows that the action is intentional. Morning Star is a common goal that is achieved through peer learning in a nuanced way, and through deeper mutual intersubjectivity. Intersubjectivity requires initiative, listening to the other and understanding perspective, as well as linguistic exchange. According to Kronqvist (2004), these are obligatory conditions for successful collaboration. In the inal stage, when the players are close to the target, they are creating the same, new thing in the game almost synchronously. At this point, the negotiations, questions and mutual teaching have turned into talking out loud to themselves (Episode 1). Finally, the players manage to reach their goal: Topi’s parent: Five minutes. Boys, now, ive minutes. Mikael: Okay, that’s ine. Topi: Okay. Mikael: Now, yes, I have mor[e]…I just take a little like this… Topi: Dark matter, picks, dark, no but… what am I doing… Mikael: Dark matter, picks [pickaxes] over there. Okay, I put some 178 Peer Teaching and Learning of those here, like this, this, this, this, this. Now we do this, like this. Now, yes, now. Now a lot of these come... really… I take only a little of this dark matter… Topi: Guess what I have? Mikael: What? Topi: Morning Star. Mikael: Yes. In the second period of the gaming session, Mikael starts acting more independently, and tries diferent solutions on his own. he players might work on their own for longer periods of time, but when one of them needs help, both are immediately drawn back into the joint action and dialogue (Episode 2): Topi: I really need to make a chest. Mikael: Like so, so, so… [mumbles] Topi: I have an invi… [inventory] full of red matter. Mikael: Okay. I’ll just put some things in there. What…okay, one can’t do that. So, can one put any of these in? No, only Silver Ingots… [explains his own testing] Topi: Okay, now I have also Dark Matter in here, good. Mikael: I just take some of these…Silver Ingots…not really, let’s take some of these… Topi: Dark Matter Mikael: So, let’s check one of those over here… Topi: I did…[mumbles] Mikael: [mumbles] h-th-this is way, not that way, yes, now! Topi: Okay! Mikael: [lits his arm] Mum, come and see! [mumbles] a couple of stacks of these… Mikael: Here is my red matter! hen one creates some more…let’s take some more Topi: How much red matter do you have? Mikael: Wait, see, let me tell you soon, as soon as I’ve put these emeralds in here… Mikael: Forty-two. Peer learning emerges in the material as negotiation and guidance, but also includes commanding the other and relecting out loud. It is 179 Sara Sintonen, Maj-Britt Kentz & Lasse Lipponen clearly not simply a discussion as an exchange of ideas; a discussion during a Minecrat gaming session manifests itself as social, shared thinking (Mercer, 1996) that also progresses synchronously at the level of the players’ activities. Mercer noted that not all speech helps learning, but found exploratory talk – characterized by collaborative relection, problem analysis, comparison of explanations and making joint decisions – particularly important for community and peer learning. his feature of peer learning (exploratory talk, shared thinking) are visible in Episode 3: Topi: he other option is, that you write in there…wait a minute. Write. Wait a minute. Can you write the same thing, the one, how did you get the EM…EMC machine? Mikael: Hmm…? Topi: hat E N E R G Y. Mikael: Yes? Topi: Write it down. Although in our material peer learning is based primarily in linguistic activities, the gaming sessions also emphasized the importance of sharing the game view (Episode 4). Sharing the representation and looking at it together gives the boys an opportunity to point at this representation. his makes it possible for them to ‘see’ what the other is thinking. In this way, tools serve primarily to facilitate interaction and participation between people. Minecrat is a framework for the action, but does not limit or determine it: Mikael: [shows his screen via FaceTime to Topi] Topi: See there, at the top, a chest. Mikael: Oh, those? Topi: hat’s the place for those, for those chips Mikael: Oh, you mean those, with that kind of, chest, with a lot of colours, you mean? Topi: Y-yes Mikael: Yes, yes, I’ll take them both, because I’m not sure which one it is. Topi: Mmm, oh, are there two of those? Mikael: Yes. Topi: ...equal? 180 Peer Teaching and Learning Mikael: Yes. Topi: Okay, then it’s right. he learners have equal decision-making power (because both are building on their own, but with the same content), and mutual respect. his is in line with Slavin’s (2014) view of peer learning as being about a common will to succeed, rather than competition. Slavin emphasizes the role of a shared, clearly deined objective in a successful peer learning experience. In his view, the objective and the action have to be suiciently challenging, with none of the parties acting as a helper to another, but everyone is supposed to learn. he situation must be enjoyable, as peer learning is strongly social and communal in nature. his is illustrated in Episode 5: Topi: You know morning star? Mikael: Oh, what? Topi: You know morning star? Mikael: Yes, I... [is listening while working] Topi: Have you ever managed to make one? Mikael: No, what’s morning star? [stops for listening] Topi: Well, it’s like, if you right-click [on the mouse], it will attract a lot of that kind of cobblestone, and will leave the ores in there. Mikael: Okay, how you do it, I want to know? Topi: You need to put, wait a minute, I need to check that too. Blah. You need to have a lot of red matter. Mikael: Okay, I’m already copying them here, it works! Topi: Okay, let me see. In the above exchange, one player probes the other for his knowledge of Minecrat’s morning star tool. As the dialogue progresses, it is discovered that the asker himself is slightly unsure how to use it. However, the players solve this together. Ogden (2000) brings up an interesting point concerning collaboration and peer learning: making sense together. He argues that, in addition to a common language, the parties need to have an understanding of others and the environment. his includes mutual respect (De Lisi, 2002). Shared Minecrat creating sessions, like the episodes presented here, are possible only when both parties are familiar with each other’s — partly unspoken — intentions, goals and beliefs, in addition to a very sophisticated communication system (ibid., 181 Sara Sintonen, Maj-Britt Kentz & Lasse Lipponen 215). In this case, this includes knowledge of the game’s terminology. Interestingly, the players have taught themselves the sophisticated communication system without adult guidance. Discussion Minecrat is an environment where young people can create, play and communicate with others. In this case, two ive-year-olds were on their way to doing this, for instance, collaborating as multiplayers in a local setting. hey were creating and producing their own digital culture, whereby ‘communities entice learning by initiating a give and take dialogue between individuals across all backgrounds and skill levels’ (Kuznetsov & Paulos, 2010:7). Our study shows that also these very young children are comfortable in a digital environment, exploiting it in highly diverse and rapidly developing ways. he players’ collaboration conveys both insensitivity and sensitivity in cheering, encouraging and helping the other player. As well as skills related to playing Minecrat (e.g. IT skills, English, mathematics), the players learn social skills and how to settle conlicts. hey also develop new rules for the game, as a kind of in-game play, expressing their creativity. Game discourse is a dialogue between two amateur experts, whereby ideas, experiences and observations related to other digital cultures are also shared. Further, our own analysis of the players’ creative and productive actions shows that digital tools are not an ‘addition’ to their activity, but rather an integral part of it. hese tools mediate player communication and actions. In this case, the ive-year-olds’ gaming knowhow and the skills and knowledge associated with the game are a product of participation and playing together, rather than a prerequisite for participation. his is an interesting inding: these ive-year-olds are capable of intersubjective digital production and scafolding. It is particularly remarkable that the two players spontaneously and continuously created new tools for shared action: diferent concepts and stories related to the action. Sara Sintonen, Associate Professor, Senior Lecturer, Department Faculty of Educational Sciences, University University of Helsinki, Finland, sara.sintonen@helsinki.fi Maj-Britt Kentz, Ph.D. student, School of Educational Sciences and Psychology/ Philosophical Faculty, University of Eastern Finland, majbritt.kentz@gmail.com Lasse Lipponen, Professor of Early Childhood Education, Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Helsinki, Finland, lasse.lipponen@helsinki.fi 182 Peer Teaching and Learning hus, they deliberately sought to change their social practices and their material, instrumental world. At the same time, they moved towards a common understanding of which resources are available, where to ind them, and how they are used and reproduced. Notes 1. 2. his article has been modiied by the writers of the original Finnish version. It will be published in Kasvatus & Aika, 2017, http://www.kasvatus-ja-aika.i/site/ Dark matter is an extremely powerful material for buildings in Minecrat that is undestructible. Red matter is an item that can be used to upgrade other items. References Bandura, Albert (1997). Self-eicacy. he exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman. Banks, Jon & Potts, Jason (2010). Towards a cultural science of videogames: Evolutionary social learning. Cultural Science, 3(1): 1-17. Bebbington, Sandra & Vellino, Andre (2015). Can playing Minecrat improve teenagers’ information literacy? Journal of Information Literacy 9(2): 6, 5-26. Bruns, Axel (2008). Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life and Beyond. From Production to Produsage. New York: Peter Lang. Chaudron, Stephane (2015). Young children and digital technology. A qualitative exploratory study across seven countries. JRC science and policy reports. http:// publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC93239/lbna27052enn.pdf [Accessed 2.8.2016]. Cipollone, Maria; Schiter, Catherine C. & Mofat, Rick A. (2014). Minecrat as a creative tool: A case study. International Journal of Game-Based Learning 4(2):1-14. De Lisi, Richard (2002). From marbles to Instant Messenger™: Implications of Piaget’s ideas about peer learning. heory into Practice 41(1): 5-12. Donmoyer, Robert (2009). 3 Generalizability and the Single-case Study, pp. 45-69 in R. Gomm, M. Hammersley, & P. Foster (eds.) Case Study Method. London, England: SAGE Publications Ltd. Duncan, Sean C. (2011). Minecrat, beyond construction and survival. Well Played: A journal on video games, value and meaning, 1(1): 1-22. Fawcett, Lillian M. & Garton, Alison F. (2005). he efect of peer collaboration on children’s problem-solving ability. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(2): 157-169. Greeno, James (1997). On claims that answer the wrong questions. Educational Researcher, 26(1): 5-17. Koutsouras, Panagiotis; Martindale, Sarah & Crabtree, Andy (2016). ‘We don’t sell blocks’ exploring Minecrat’s commissioning market. Conference: 1st International Joint Conference of DiGRA and FDG. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303275551_We_don%27t_sell_blocks_exploring_Minecrat%27s_commissioning_market [Accessed 2.9.2016]. Kronqvist, Eeva-Liisa (2004). Mitä lapsiryhmässä tapahtuu? Pienten lasten yhteistoiminta, sen rakentuminen ja kehittyminen spontaaneissa leikkitilanteissa. [What happens in a group of children? Collaboration of small children, its construction and development in spontaneous play situations] Doctoral dissertation, University of Oulu. http://jultika.oulu.i/iles/isbn9514273915.pdf [Accessed 3.9.2016]. 183 Sara Sintonen, Maj-Britt Kentz & Lasse Lipponen Kuznetsov, Stacey & Paulos, Eric (2010). Rise of the Expert Amateur: DIY Projects, Communities, and Cultures. Proceedings of the 6th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Extending Boundaries http://www.staceyk.org/hci/ KuznetsovDIY.pdf [Accessed 3 Oct 2016, 10 Mar 20163.10.2016] Leino, Kaisa (2016). Monipuolinen verkkotekstien käyttö tukee tekstitaitoja, [Using diverse online texts supports literacy skills] pp. 46-58 in K. Leino, & O. Kallionpää (eds.) Monilukutaitoa digiaikaan: lukemisen ja kirjoittamisen uudet haasteet ja mahdollisuudet. Helsinki: Äidinkielen opettajain liitto. Mercer, Neil (1996). he quality of talk in children’s collaborative activity in the classroom. Learning and Instruction, 6(4): 359-377. Milton, Stephanie (2014). Minecrat Combat Handbook. Egmont Kustannus, Helsinki. Niemeyer, Dodie J. & Gerber, Hannah L. (2015). Maker culture and Minecrat: implications for the future of learning. Educational Media International 52(3): 216-226. Noppari, Elina (2014). Mobiilimuksut. Lasten ja nuorten mediaympäristön muutos, osa 3. [Mobile kids. he change of children’s and young people’s media environment, part 3] Tampere: Journalismin, viestinnän ja median tutkimuskeskus COMET. http:// www.uta.i/cmt/index/mobiilimuksut.pdf [Accessed15.9.2016]. Oakley, Bec (2014). What is Minecrat all about? MineMum [Blog] http://minemum. com/what-is-minecrat [Accessed 12.10.2016]. Ogden, Lynn (2000). Collaborative tasks, collaborative children: An analysis of reciprocity during peer interaction at Key Stage 1. British Educational Research Journal 26(2): 211-226. Selwyn, Neil (2003). ‘Doing IT for the Kids’: re-examining children, computers and the ‘information society’. Media, Culture & Society 25(3), 351-378. Slavin, Robert E. (2014). Making Cooperative Learning Powerful. Five key practices bring out the tremendous potential of this approach. Educational Leadership 72(2): 22-26. Sorin, Reesa (2005). Changing Images of Childhood – Reconceptualising Early Childhood Practice. International Journal of Transitions in Childhood, 1(1): 12-21. Säljö, Roger 2001. Oppimiskäytännöt – sosiokulttuurinen näkökulma. Helsinki: WSOY. Vygotsky, Len S. (1978). Mind in Society. he Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wernholm, Marina & Vigmo, Sylvi (2015). Capturing children’s knowledge-making dialogues in Minecrat. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 38(3): 230-246. Wu, Hong-An (2016). Video game prosumers: Case study of a Minecrat ainity space. Visual Arts Research, 42(1): 22-37. 184 15 “Children Love to be Hilariously Silly and Dead-Serious Alike” Interview with Margret Albers M argret Albers has been managing director of the Children’s Media Foundation GOLDENER SPATZ and director of the German Children’s Media Film Festival of the same name from 1996 to 2016. She developed the festival from a film and television only festival to a media festival where children are engaged at several levels. In addition, she is the board spokeswoman of the Association for the Promotion of German Children’s Film. Together with Thomas Hailer and Greg Childs, she is responsible for the direction of studies at the Academy for Children’s Media. She is also project director for the initiatives Outstanding Films for Children, and Television from Thuringia1. Albers was recently nominated president of the European Children’s Film Association. You have been the managing director of the German Children’s Media Festival “Goldener Spatz” from 1996 to 2016. How did you come up with the idea to introduce the Spixel-Award for television productions of children into the festival in 2005? From the mid-90s on, we had an increasing amount of submissions from projects and institutions which enable or support children to produce ilms. Some of these ilms were of remarkable quality. Since the festival’s competition is aimed at professionals, we started to present a selection of ilms in a side-programme called “Up- and Coming Talents” in 1999. Facing an increase of productions made by children that have been aired either on Public Access or Regional TV, on the long term this non-competitive slot turned out to be unsatisfactory. 185 “Children Love to be Hilariously Silly and Dead-Serious Alike”. Interview with Margret Albers in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Interview with Margret Albers herefore we teamed up with the huringian Media Authority, which runs the “Public Access Children’s Channel PiXEL” in Gera and started with this competition for TV productions made by children. Image 1. SPiXEL- Logo Source: Deutsche Kindermedienstitung GOLDENER SPATZ What is the main idea behind the Spixel Award and which age groups do you address? here are diferent awards that have their focus on the media-educational process, which leads to an audio-visual product. In the case of the Spixel the focus lies on the production itself. To submit a ilm it has to be aired on TV or (since 2016) been made available on the internet. he aim is to support and award high quality and experimental TV productions made by children, age 8 to 14. What kind of challenges did you have to manage with the Spixel Award in the beginning? We had to make it known at the right places, but that actually happened quite fast because the approach of the competition is quite unique. In the irst year, the age group was “up to 12 years”. his turned out to be diicult. One of the main criteria of the award is that the ilms have to express the children’s viewpoint. Especially in case of productions made by young children, the viewpoint of the educators became very evident. herefore we changed the age range into 8 – 14, which actually works quite well. 186 “Children Love to be Hilariously Silly and Dead-Serious Alike” Why do you diferentiate between animation productions, feature film productions, and information or documentary productions? To display the variety of TV productions made by children. Most of the TV formats made by children can be diferentiated in these categories, as animation, feature ilm and information/documentary. How would you describe the creative process behind the productions? As diferent as the productions are, [so are] the creative processes behind them: Sometimes friends join in their spare time together to be creative. In some cases, children who have never met before take part in a media summer camp, develop an idea, and make a ilm. “Making a ilm or magazine” could also be part of a project week at school. here are also children who do every step of ilmmaking on their own, but that is rather an exception, like Midas Kempke’s 7-minute stop motion “Harry Potter and the Lego-Philosopher’s Stone – Part III”, which won the animation Spixel in 2013. he Toolbox available for children to display their creativity has grown larger and more technical. Most of them have at least access to small high resolution cameras or smartphones and you don’t have to pay a fortune for editing-sotware anymore. Nonetheless, the production of a TV programme, either as a magazine or short ilm, is a crat. While developing and inally producing a programme, children igure out that it is more diicult than it seems on irst sight. Skilful media educators who are not eager to realise their own visions are crucial at this point – they give advice and support and don’t intend to lead throughout the process. Usually children develop basic skills quickly and react to production restrictions (e.g. huge explosions) with new, more manageable ideas. Being part of a ilm or TV project is for the participants being part of a creative process and in most cases a positive teamwork experience. The Spixel competition has now been running for 12 years. Can you summarize some tendencies in the production of the participating children regarding style, topics, professional role models for the children, passion for television or….? 187 Interview with Margret Albers Image 2. Happy Award Winners & Jury 2016. Source: Deutsche Kindermedienstitung GOLDENER SPATZ he popularity of crime/detective stories is unbroken since we started with the Spixel Award. Also, picking up topics that are relevant while growing up, like friendship and irst love. In recent years, we had an increasing number of productions dealing with mobbing in its analogue and digital variations. hroughout all categories, children display a strong sense of justice and [show] that they care about the environment and the fate of other people. In magazine formats, grown-up interview partners oten have a hard time to deal with the frankness of the interviewing children. Regularly the diference of what grown-ups say and what they do is unmasked. In this context, the young TV makers also like to provoke. In the street-interview format “What makes you ask these stupid questions?” (2010) passers-by in Hamburg are asked questions like “Who is lazier – we schoolkids or unemployed people?” he answers 188 “Children Love to be Hilariously Silly and Dead-Serious Alike” are revealing. Also, in terms of style children display a sometimes very quirky sense of humour, like in the stop motion production “Who let the plopp out” (2014): Rapper “Bottle” (actually a beer bottle) is abducted by two Ninja-Pine-Cones. Over the years there have been a lot of parodies of popular TV-formats, especially casting shows, which makes obvious how well known and liked TV-formats are. Could you please summarize your experiences with the award in term of children’s creativity? he use of audiovisual means to display their creativity becomes more and more natural for children. hey are quick adaptors of formats and like to play with them. hey love to be hilariously silly and dead-serious alike. Unfortunately neither media nor education acknowledge, value or support this immense creative potential as they should. Note 1. http://www.kids-regio.org/speakers/albers-margret/ 189 Training Teachers to Spark Young People’s Creativity he educational setting is a place where creative expressions can stimulate learning and facilitate the appropriation of new knowledge. In this section, the reader will ind examples of how this can be done through diferent teaching methods. 16 AMORES Discovering a Love for Literature Through Digital Collaboration and Creativity Geoff Walton, Mark Childs, Janet Hetherington & Gordana Jugo What is AMORES and why was it necessary? More than a ith of children and young people (23 per cent) rarely or never read (GB: Department for Education, 2012) on their own time, and nearly a ith (17 per cent) would be embarrassed (Clark, 2012) if their friends saw them reading. Many school children lack knowledge of their own national or broader European literature. Teachers ind it challenging to interest children (especially boys) in reading literature, but agree that the use of ICT could help raise the level of student interest. To implement ICT in literacy teaching, we argue that teachers need not only expertise in using ICT but also a new teaching methodology in order to ind efective ways of using ICT to engage pupils in reading and writing through the creation of e-artefacts. What we mean by e-artefact is anything that can be communicated digitally, such as a photograph, video, digital comic strip, blog entry, tweet or Facebook post, and that is based in some way on a story that the schoolchildren are reading. What we mean by literature is more contested, but keeping in mind the rationale that reading is of value in a person’s development – for example because it requires extended focus and concentration – and that storytelling is imperative, while wanting to be lexible concerning what was important to the children, we regarded extended narratives in any format as literature. Hence, from the examples given by the 193 Walton, Geof, Childs, Mark; Hetherington, Janet & Jugo, Gordana (2017). AMORES. Discovering a Love for Literature Through Digital Collaboration and Creativity in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Geoff Walton, Mark Childs, Janet Hetherington & Gordana Jugo children themselves, faniction, autobiographies and graphic novels were included, while magazines, websites and computer code were excluded. AMORES was designed to address the issue of children’s disengagement with literature through a new teaching methodology of interactivity and collaboration using ICT and the pupils’ creativity, which requires teachers to become more digitally literate and use these new capabilities in their teaching in the classroom. Image 1. AMORES logo competition winner designed by Rafaela Familia from 1st Model Experimental Primary School of Rhodes, Greece How did we do this? he project used an approach called Participatory Research in Action, or PRA (Fetterman, Katarian & Wandersman, 1996). his treats teachers as experts, placing them at the heart of the process, empowering them to express their opinions and identify what they need to know to become digitally literate. It is also based on the idea that learners construct meaning through the act of design and collaborative learning, whereby meaning is constructed jointly by a community (social constructivism). Teachers are excellently positioned to be actively engaged in the research process, and are able to introduce young people to this method. Using this technique and working with children and young people to create e-artefacts, the researchers and the participants learn from each other as equals (Tavares, Hepworth & De Souza Costa, 2011). Ultimately, this not only enables teachers to deliver the research aims 194 AMORES AMORES, a two-year European Union-funded project under the Comenius Multilateral strand of the Lifelong Learning Programme, is a collaboration between schools from Croatia, Denmark, Poland, Sweden and the UK, led by CARNet (Croatia) and three UK higher education institutions (Coventry, Northumbria and Stafordshire Universities). It secured €299,500 and ran until the end of November 2015. All the resources mentioned here are freely available for download via the AMORES website: www.amores-project.eu. but also enables each teacher to incorporate his or her own personal goals into the process. PRA is seen as favoured because it takes into consideration local knowledge and experience, and is therefore arguably more practical and thus indings may be more deliverable in the future (Reason & Bradbury, 2011). hus, ownership of the AMORES process by teachers is more secure because they are involved in both the research itself and the outcomes of the project. his ultimately leads to improved research results and an enhancement of teachers’ professional practice in digital literacy. The teachers’ face-to-face workshops We held a teacher workshop in Stoke on Trent in March 2014, led by the UK partners (Northumbria, Stafordshire and Coventry Universities). his not only established the PRA community of practice but also informed the creation of a six-week online course (May-June 2014) as well as a second workshop, held in Stoke in March 2015. The benefit of engaging teachers as co-researchers is twofold: not only do we gain their expertise and knowledge regarding using technology in this context; they also get the experience of embedding technology as part of their teaching practices, and are able to use the research process to procure time for learning and to relect upon their teaching experiences. In developing the PRA methods, speciic issues which may impact upon the teachers’ involvement were also taken into account. Prior to the workshop a questionnaire had been disseminated to gather data on current practice and user needs. he questionnaire’s indings were 195 Geoff Walton, Mark Childs, Janet Hetherington & Gordana Jugo Image 2. Teacher workshop, Stoke on Trent, UK, March 2013 summarized to provide an introduction to all the schools involved, and to inform the selection of which technologies to suggest to the teachers for use. hese activities were included to enable participants to feel more comfortable in working with each other, and to demonstrate that their views and experiences were highly valued. his approach helps participants feel more able to inluence decision-making, even though the project objectives had been established in the EU bid beforehand. his approach ensured that the group felt an ownership of the objectives. he irst workshop comprised three sections, over three days (a second workshop was held in March 2015). Two teachers from each participating country (except Poland, from which one teacher attended) as well as representatives from the lead partner (CARNet Croatia) and the quality assurance organization 36.6 from Poland, participated. Section 1: Each teacher was encouraged to think about the wider school environment and consider how technology was being used within the home, in out-of-school settings (including libraries), and in the home environment. Teachers talked about and shared their experiences of using technology, and relected upon their learning needs. 196 AMORES Section 2: he research team presented potential ways in which technology could be used to help support literacy work, and worked with the teachers to relect on and develop these uses. Section 3: he teachers discussed how their learning and the relationships that had developed over the course of the workshop could inluence the structure of the next part of the project, and began drawing up initial plans to implement this. hrough this process they developed content for the online teacher-training plan. Mapping and asset-building While we used a number of interactive techniques in the workshop, here we describe one in particular. Participants were asked to work in small groups to develop images of a typical learner in their education system. he teachers were placed in groups of two and given a large piece of lipchart paper. One drew around the other to create a representation of a learner. hey then drew a line down the middle of the outline drawing and began discussing the typical characteristics of their learners, listing these in the drawing. he advantage of this task was that participants were able to start identifying with the similarities and diferences between education systems, societies, and the experiences of the young people. It also helped them relect upon their assumptions and knowledge concerning the lives of their learners. It prompted discussion concerning how to best work with learners, and indicated points of similarity that could be exploited to support communication between learners from the diferent schools. Online course Based on the outcomes of the workshop, a plan was devised for the teachers’ online training course to further enhance and embed their digital literacy capabilities. In brief, the online course lasted approximately six weeks and consisted of the following activities: creating videos and comic strips, and learning about games-based learning. he platform used was Edmodo (a secure social medium speciically designed for schools), and using videoconferencing for collaborative learning. he course, delivered via Moodle, can be found at http://www. amores-project.eu/results.html . 197 Geoff Walton, Mark Childs, Janet Hetherington & Gordana Jugo Teachers engaged strongly with the video creation section of the online course as well as the comic strips, and the evidence for this comes through very clearly in the inal artefacts created by the students. However, they were less engaged with the games-based learning and the Edmodo platform itself. Edmodo was used more as a repository for students’ e-artefacts than for genuine discussion and collaboration between students. Our teacher colleagues were generally positive regarding the online course, but one teacher mentioned that it may have been better to “use the online module as a test for the ideas in the implementation phase, pick a speciic book and try to create some lesson plans so we can compare approaches in diferent school systems. hat way everyone could see how it could actually be incorporated into reading in the classroom; [in other words,] building the ship while sailing.” In parallel with the online course, the project team drew up a Technology Selections Report based on what the teachers felt they needed in order to enhance their digital literacy capabilities. his report used the SECTIONS model (Students [i.e. users], Ease of use, Costs, Teaching & learning, Interactivity, Organization, Novelty and Speed) developed by Bates and Poole (2010), which is a framework for evaluating technology and can be found at http://www.amores-project.eu/results.html . Drating and piloting a new teaching methodology he teachers involved in the project and the research team jointly drated an innovative teaching methodology – the most important result of the AMORES project – which promotes student creativity, interaction and engagement with literature. As opposed to simply reading a book and writing a book report, the methodology includes the following steps: reading the book, creating e-artefacts based on the book, sharing these e-artefacts with peers via social networks and videoconference, and inally relecting on the process. he literature review, accessible at http://www.amores-project.eu/ d1-1-download indicates that creating artefacts is a learning strategy that involves the highest-order learning skills, found at the top of the revised Bloom’s taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2011). he pedagogical theory that best describes learning by creating is that of Papert’s idea of constructionism. his emphasizes not only the learning that is 198 AMORES triggered by the constructivist approach of activity-based learning (or learning by doing), but also the importance of the learning that occurs as a result of discussion leading to shared meanings. he recommended instructional strategy is therefore collaborative creation, which is underpinned by the theory of social constructivism. In brief, collaborative learning is described within social constructivism as a means by which meaning is constructed jointly by a community (Conole, Littlejohn, Falconer & Jefery, 2005). Lewis, Pea and Rosen (2010) summarize social constructivism as the process in which “by together questioning texts and situations, conceptualizing problems, designing solutions, building artifacts, redesigning, re-conceptualizing and reinterpreting, people generate forms of public knowledge that in turn provide conceptual and relational support for further interaction and learning”. Lewis, Pea and Rosen (2010) remark that “students engage in deep learning when they research, design and construct an artifact or model as a representation of their knowledge” and that “constructionism links personal and social inluences on learning because the artefact produced is an output of the interaction of personal and social knowledge construction that needs to be meaningful and made public”. he model for this online collaboration was Dahlsveen’s storytelling arc (Tilkin, Paulus, Biesen, & Land, 2011), which was reinterpreted by the authors as a cycle.1 When viewed as a cyclical process, the storytelling arc closely resembles Kolb’s experiential learning cycle2 (Kolb, Rubin & Osland, 1991). he act of telling the story is motivational for the creation of the story, and feedback from audiences promotes further motivation for creating more stories. hese two forms of interaction resulted in marked diferences in the success of their implementation. he use of the social media platform was used as a collaborative tool only in its later stages, and only to the extent that students commented on and “liked” particular artefacts. Reasons for this included unfamiliarity with using social media for learning, and diiculty organizing content within the platform, resulting in its being used purely as a content repository. he videoconferencing was highly efective, however, commonly on the second attempt. Initial attempts displayed the usual initial barriers to interaction through the medium (indicating that the initial training course had not been successful in relaying how to circumvent these 199 Geoff Walton, Mark Childs, Janet Hetherington & Gordana Jugo barriers). Students displayed the storytelling and audience relationships indicated by the Dahlsveen model, with no discernible impairment due to the distanced mode. Unanticipated barriers involved the small age diference between participants (small to us but large to the students) and students’ self-consciousness over a (misplaced) perception of poor language ability. he conclusions from this interaction are that rehearsal, planning and playfulness will help students develop the conidence to present and respond in videoconferencing activities. Modelling learning activities online will help teachers comprehend how social media can be used to facilitate the sharing and co-creation of content. Students need time to relect on the creation of e-artefacts. Relection as a whole class exercise, in which students can see each other’s work, can also be motivational and is the point at which learning about the meaning and content of the literature can be investigated in more depth. In fact, we would argue that it is because the creation of artefacts requires relection that the AMORES methodology is such an efective learning process. In this regard, videos (in which students appear) seem to work best as shared classroom activities as students ind them more personally engaging and because they take a longer time to create, thus extending the period for which a text is investigated and resulting in deeper relection. Bilateral videoconferences A number of bilateral videoconferences (VCs) took place; here we describe a typical event. Having read the book Mio my Son (original title Mio min Mio, by children’s author Astrid Lindgren), Swedish students presented the e-artefacts they had created to Croatian students. he 28 students on the Swedish side, and the 16 Croatian students with their teachers, met online in May 2015. he Swedish students presented their e-artefacts about Swedish author Astrid Lindgren and her story. hey had made ilms in iMovie in which they presented parts of the book (iMovie e-artefacts were shared through Edmodo). he ilms were sent to Croatia in advance, so that the Croatian students could prepare questions to ask during the VC. he Croatian students also voted for the best e-artefact. 200 AMORES Image 3. Danish students visit Poland World Book Day All ive schools taking part in the project held a joint VC on World Book Day, 23 April 2015. Around 60 students and ten teachers from Denmark, Croatia, Poland, Sweden and the UK shared their experiences in the project up to that point, and talked about some of the books they had read. E-artefacts competition We launched a competition open to all schoolchildren in the EU. Contestants were invited to enter their e-artefact in the form of a video or digital comic strip. Five judges, including Dr Jane Secker (Chair of ILG), chose the winning entry, which was announced in August 2015. he winning videos and comic strips are displayed on our website, and the prize was a visit to Dubrovnik, Croatia. Research results Students were surveyed through a number of mechanisms suggested by the central research team of the project, but individual schools were 201 Geoff Walton, Mark Childs, Janet Hetherington & Gordana Jugo Image 4. An example of an e-artefact from a cartoon generator allowed to apply those they considered appropriate for their learners, in keeping with the participative and egalitarian ethos of the project. Where surveys were conducted, data were anonymized by allowing the children to select a pseudonym for their responses. A master list of pseudonyms and real names was kept by teachers on paper, and never let the classroom. his meant that all electronic iles contained only pseudonymized information. In the UK we found that Diary of a Wimpy Kid is a very popular book amongst ten-year-olds, and that the most popular author is David Walliams. From the data we have gathered since the new teaching methodology was tried out, we know that our participant schoolchildren now get more from the stories they are reading; this is manifest in a much greater depth of understanding for both plot and characters. UK schoolchildren created video e-artefacts that explored the story in their own words, which demonstrated a richness in comprehension and knowledge of the text. In Sweden, we found that the factors encouraging children to read were numerous. We asked them what they had read most recently (a mechanism for inding a randomly selected cross-section of their reading material). Amongst the older children (14 and 15 years old) 202 AMORES who responded, we found that the most recent literature they had read fell into one of the following categories: • A text set by the school (or a sequel to a set text), cited by half the sample • A ilm tie-in (either the novelization of ilm, or a book on which a recently released ilm had been based) • A book within the fantasy genre • A biography of a sports star or heavy metal musician (i.e. Zlatan Ibrahimović, AC/DC or Ozzy Osbourne) • Faniction3 • Responses we did not count as literature (magazine, website or social media) he inclusion of soccer and heavy metal is a relection of the issues of masculinity that surround the issue of reading. Many of the respondents (particularly those who used male pseudonyms) reported that they did not like reading, but still reported that they frequently read for fun. his was interpreted by teachers as an aversion to boys categorizing themselves as readers, even though they read, as they perceived this as un-masculine. Boys with higher social status, and self-conidence, had no qualms about self-identifying as readers. he interpretation of the “sports or metal” inding is that some boys will admit to reading a book if it is about what they perceive as an uncontestably male subject. Amongst the younger readers (12 to 13 years old), the greatest diference was that they read more texts that were not set by teachers: only two of 42 children reported that the last book they had read was a set text, compared with 44 of 88 of the older age group. his indicates that at this age they are far more proactive in inding texts that interest them. As with the older students, fantasy, ilm tie-ins and the “sports or metal” biographies also featured, whereas diferences included the presence of graphic novels and teen dramas. Responses regarding the last item read that were not regarded as literature included newspapers, subtitles in a movie, an inode (a text descriptor in Linux or Unix) and the survey tool itself! 203 Geoff Walton, Mark Childs, Janet Hetherington & Gordana Jugo Impact of the project The most important impact of the project is the success of the AMORES teaching methodology, with 14 participating teachers and around 400 students, which brought about a change in the teaching of national literature by increasing students’ engagement with literary works. his is clearly visible in the evaluation report, showing that the use of the AMORES methodology contributes to greater student engagement. he teachers who took part in the project were very pleased with how the use of the methodology had an impact on their classes. All participating teachers were willing to use the AMORES methodology ater the pilot implementation and ater the end of the project in their literature classes. Additionally, there have also been examples of teachers using the AMORES methodology in other subjects, such as the social sciences. There were several examples of establishing partnerships with schools and other stakeholders outside the project. he project team held a number of workshops for teachers on how to use the teaching methodology and meetings with the aim of presenting the AMORES methodology and facilitating its adoption by teachers, principals and librarians. his has helped establish a network that will make it possible to encourage more educators to use the AMORES methodology in their classes. his network includes about 40 teachers from the workshops who did not participate in the pilot implementation, and about 70 stakeholders who were present at meetings with members of the AMORES team. he stakeholders included teachers and principals, school librarians, publishers, and a national volunteer reading programme. Furthermore, at the project website there have been more than 380 registered downloads of the project outcomes, the most popular of which is the AMORES Revised Methodology. he digital training materials intended to help educators make the best use of the methodology in their classrooms have undergone several stages, and are available at the project website: http://www.amores-project.eu/results . hese training materials, available in English, Croatian, Danish, Polish and Swedish, have been accessed about 800 times. Teachers formed a community of practice, sharing ideas and examples of good practice as well as supporting each other in the implementation of the AMORES methodology. he communication went 204 AMORES through diferent channels, including the AMORES teacher mailing list, the AMORES Facebook community, and the AMORES teacher closed group. What was encouraging in terms of the AMORES methodology extended beyond changes in the learning of literature. Although the project promotes the reading of literature and digital literacy, it is in its development of students’ personal sense of self-eicacy and co-oper- Image 5. Poster of AMORES teaching methodology 205 Geoff Walton, Mark Childs, Janet Hetherington & Gordana Jugo ation that it has its strongest transformative power. here were many stories of students from all the countries who had not previously had the opportunity to present their abilities inding a new presence in the classroom as a result of making videos or comics, or participating in the VC. Students also developed skills in co-operation and language ability. hrough their videoconferencing, they acquired a greater knowledge of other cultures and an appreciation of the strength of their own. What the results also show, however, is an absence of impact on the extent to which children report that they like reading. In the analysis of the Swedish schoolchildren at the start of the project, the percentage of children who claimed a love for literature fell at a rate of 12 per cent per year. At the end of the project, the fall-of rate remained unchanged. he sample is too small for any clear-cut declarations; and of course, these are only the reported opinions, which are distorted by the children’s self-perceptions and how they choose to be perceived. Also, as seen above, reading is tied up with many gender-related anxieties concerning identity. Despite this, the children’s engagement with literature within the classroom is heightened, and far more enjoyable. Successful strategies for translating this to transform daily habits of reading still need to be identiied. Notes 1. 2. he storytelling arc deines the beginning and the end of a story, it’s the process of storytelling. Traditionally a story comes to an end, but in participatory environments it is possible to create an interactive way of storytelling in which the story unfolds in a circle between storyteller and listeners who participate in the creation of the story (Tilkin, Paulus, Biesen, & Land, 2011: 8-10) Kolb’s learning cycle suggests that learners’ ideas are formed and reformed continuously through experience, and that they bring their own ideas and preconceptions to difering levels of elaboration to the iterative learning process. In summary this Geoff Walton, Senior Lecturer, Information and Communications, Department Languages, information and Communications, University Manchester Metropolitan University, UK, g.walton@mmu.ac.uk Mark Childs, Afiliate Consultant, OCSLD, Oxford Brookes University, Honorary Visitor, Coventry University, UK, mark@markchilds.org Janet Hetherington, Senior Lecture, Creative Communities Unit, Staffordshire University, UK, hetheringtonjanet@hotmail.com Gordana Jugo, Head of Educational Technology, Education Support Department, Croatian Academic and Research Network - CARNet, Croatia, gordana.jugo@carnet.hr 206 AMORES 3. cycle involves: doing, relecting, processing, thinking and understanding, which are governed by the learner’s needs and goals, and all elements are necessary for learning to be achieved. Faniction websites are communities of devotees of various books, comics, ilms or games, who write their own short stories based on the characters. he teachers reported that children read these because they were simpler (oten having been written by other children), had an “underground” appeal, and were part of an online community to which they belonged (Black, 2007). References Anderson, Lorin, & Krathwohl, David (eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives: Complete edition. New York: Longman. Bates, Tony & Poole, Gary (2010). Assessing technology: Using the SECTIONS model. [Online] Available at http://wiki.ubc.ca/File:SECTIONS_Framework.pdf (Accessed 6th December 2016). Black, Rebecca (2007). Faniction writing and the construction of space, E-Learning 4 (4) page 387. Clark, Christina (2012). Children’s and young people’s reading today. Findings form the National Trust’s 2011 literacy survey. National Literacy Trust. [Online] Available at http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/research/nlt_research/p4s3 (Accessed 6th December 2016). Conole, Grainne; Littlejohn, Alison; Falconer, Isabel & Jefery, Ann (2005). Pedagogical review of learning activities and use cases, LADIE project report, JISC; August 2005. Fetterman, David; Katarian, Shakeh & Wandersman, Abraham (1996). Empowerment Evaluation. California: Sage. GB: Department for Education; Education Standards Research Team (2012). Research evidence on reading for pleasure. [Online] Available at < https://www.gov.uk/ government/publications/research-evidence-on-reading-for-pleasure > (Accessed 6th December 2016). Kolb, David; Rubin, Irwin & Osland, Joyce (1991). Organizational behavior; an experiential approach. (5th ed.). Englewood Clifs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Lewis, Sarah; Pea, Roy & Rosen, Joseph (2010). Special issue: Digitize and transfer. Social Science Information, Vol. 49(3): 1–19 . Reason, Peter & Bradbury Hilary (2011). Handbook of action research: participative inquiry and practice. London: Sage. Tavares, Rosemeire; Hepworth, Mark & De Souza Costa, Sely (2011). Investigating citizens’ information needs through participative research: a pilot study in Candangolandia, Brazil. Information Development, 27(2), pp. 125-138. Tilkin, Guy; Paulus, Michèle; Biesen, Alden & Land, Jennifer (2011). 1001 Stories for Adult Learning, Sheherazade Consortium. [Online] Available at http://www.sheherazade. eu/sites/default/iles/manuals/Manual_English.pdf (Accessed 6th December 2016). 207 17 Bringing Maker Literacies to Early Childhood Education Jill Scott & Karen Wohlwend iteracies are proliferating at a rapid pace as new ways of making meaning become possible with the advent of powerful technologies and innovative practices. his is especially evident in makerspaces (Peppler & Bender, 2013) where new forms of literacy emerge in encounters with digital media (e.g., ilmmaking and animation) and manufacturing technologies (e.g., sewing, woodworking, and robotics). Museums, libraries, ater-school clubs, and other out-of-school spaces ofer informal learning spaces for children and youth in an ever-expanding network of youth makerspaces. Despite this burst of innovation outside schools, classrooms in the United States look eerily similar to classrooms of the last century, perhaps the chalkboards have been replaced with whiteboards, but the books and seatwork paper-pencil lessons remain squarely situated in traditional literacy practices. However, a quick scan of the playground in those same schools reveals a lively peer culture, enlivened and circulated by digital media that ills children’s new textual landscapes. We know from our ongoing literacy playshop research with young children in early childhood classrooms that popular media toys are an important resource for children’s media production (Wohlwend et al., 2013; Medina & Wohlwend, 2014; Wohlwend, 2015, 2016). When children are given an opportunity to play together at school, their play oten turns to making as they pause to make props for their characters: L 209 Scott, Jill & Wohlwend, Karen (2017) Bringing Maker Literacies to Early Childhood Education in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Jill Scott & Karen Wohlwend from paper crowns for Elsa and Anna (Disney’s Frozen) or fashion a cape for hor (Marvel’s Avengers) from a play kitchen tablecloth. It has also become evident pre-service teacher training must better prepare teachers to respond to the student’s interests in popular culture, play, and making. Maker literacies (Wohlwend et al., in press 2017) that include popular media, toyhacking, and creating ilms can be included in literacy practices if pre-service teachers develop an understanding of their value and place within the literacy curriculum. How do we tap into the creative potential of play and making interests in a way that aligns with school literacy goals? How could early literacy curriculum and instruction expand to incorporate making into primary literacy methods courses? his study documents maker literacies pre-service teachers used when a “play, toyhacking, and ilmmaking module” was added to their primary literacy methods class. he pre-service teachers completed this module during their literacy methods course at the university. he main purpose was to encourage pre-service teachers to transform and expand their notions about what counts as literacy and literacy curriculum in early childhood education. Theoretical framework Play is a literacy that creates action texts (Wohlwend, 2011), stories enacted with bodies, toys, props, and puppets rather than print on paper. During play, players collaborate and pretend scenarios or “as if ” worlds (Holland et al., 1998), attaching agreed-upon meanings to bodies, materials, and actions (Vygotsky, 1978; hiel, 2015). he notion of toyhacking in this article enables redesign of toys’ and puppets’ materials but also their embedded texts (e.g., characters, narratives) (Rowsell & Pahl, 2006). Digital technologies save and document play and open further opportunities for redesign through video-editing. In Literacy Playshop, four processes contribute to children’s meaning-making with media: play, storying, collaboration, and production. While the three levels move inside-out and back again, the four processes are represented here as loosely-deined domains so there is no production sequence or curricular “cycle” but rather recursive connections spreading across domains in multiple and unruly directions. Each of the four processes contributes a critical, productive, and 210 Bringing Maker Literacies to Early Childhood Education interdependent aspect of meaning-making that also links to a larger curricular ield: drama, literature, diversity and community, and media and cinema arts (Wohlwend, et al., 2013, p. 46). Methods and research context of the study his project is excerpted from a ive-year study on literacy play, the data from this particular study documents the ‘play, toy hacking, and ilmmaking module’ added to four sections of a PK-31 early literacy methods course at a US Midwestern university. hree instructors and about 140 university students participated in this project. Data sources include video of pre-service teachers’ toyhacking and ilmmaking, the ilms they made with their fellow university students and their hacked toys, the elementary student’s ilms, and post project relective blog entries written by the university students. We used mediated discourse analysis (Scollon & Scollon, 2004; Wohlwend, 2007, 2014) to analyse students’ and children’s making and ilm production, tracking collaborative meanings and shits in participation. Video analysis identiied and coded maker literacies and patterns of improvisation and collaboration in the agreed-upon meanings of characters and props as well as roles for students as toy animators, camera crew, directors, musicians, and sound efect synthesizers through the process from toyhacking to video-production. Mediated discourse analysis iltering identiied moments of collaborative transformation (e.g., agreements to change characters’ texts, the emerging storyline, or students’ production roles). Transformative clips were triangulated with students’ relective blog posts (e.g., value of maker literacies in class and in later ilmmaking with children in ield experiences). Findings he sessions progressed in three stages of media pre-production, production, and post-production: toyhacking and character development, storyboarding and ilming, and video-editing and sharing. Participants began the pre-production module by deconstructing familiar characters and narratives of popular culture toy franchises, such as Barbie and Star Wars. hey looked closely at each toy to identify its commercial franchise, its character traits and ilmic narrative, 211 Jill Scott & Karen Wohlwend and the material messages in its materials. Toys are designed with anticipated identities (Wohlwend, 2009), that is, companies produce toys and games with a particular consumer demographic in mind. his guides the selection of colours, textures, shapes, and other material decisions about toys and products in order to appeal to boys or girls or age groups of children. In this study, as university students examined a commercial mass media toy, they pondered questions like, • What is the toys intended text? • Who is the toy intended for? • Who could be let out by this toy? • What could I do to change the toy’s text? Following this critical deconstruction, the participants proceeded eagerly down the hallway to visit the university’s designated makerspace where they worked to modify toys’ popular culture texts, social meanings, and the material features. In this space students were given boxes full of inexpensive commercial mass media toys that they cut, glued, painted, combined, and otherwise decorated. When newly revised characters emerged, the participants worked in small collaborative groups to create a storyline for their toys. hrough Image 1 & 2. Sally and Linus telling a new story. 212 Bringing Maker Literacies to Early Childhood Education collaborative negotiation and improvisation, stories were enacted and ilmed as students animated the toys with hand movements. Once the ilm footage was gathered, students worked together to share their expertise to edit the short ilms using the iMovie app on iPads. Most groups added voice-overs, captions, music, sound effects, setting backdrops, and textual elements. Upon completing the editing process, students shared their ilms with the entire class. Pre-service teachers expressed enthusiasm about the project through comments such as, “It was a blast!” and “I was surprised by how much fun I had”. hey also predicted they would incorporate playful making and ilmmaking in the future, saying that they felt very engaged in the process and could see value in doing similar activities in their own classrooms someday. One participant explained, he day of class that we made our toys and ilmed was one of the most fun days of college I have ever had. Even just putting together the toys stretched my brain into ways it was not used to; having to break things apart and put them back together. I can deinitely see students boosting their imagination and creativity through this process. I also can see students enjoying the ilming and editing because they love technology so much. In the following weeks, during their ield placements, the pre-service teachers dedicated two sessions to working with a focus student to share their hacked toys, create child initiated stories, build props and sets for them, and ilm their stories. In a third session with their child, the team worked together to edit their original ilms and celebrate their accomplishments. Upon relection, many pre-service teachers wrote about how the activities opened doors for creativity and meaning making. One noted that the creativity followed their child home, When I came in today, the teacher informed me that Max2 had so much fun that he went home and made his own toys for our time together this week. hey were made of clay and they matched the colour scheme and shape of the hacked toys we brought in two weeks ago. I was so excited that instead of just watching the inished ilm we also made a new ilm with his toys and our extra time. Needless to say, I think it was a really successful experience for both of us, and I would deinitely try to implement similar projects in the future! 213 Jill Scott & Karen Wohlwend While children are participating in collaborative socially constructed new literacies constantly in out and of school spaces, these participatory literacy practices typically are not welcomed in school. We currently live in an age of accountability, in which, the central driving force of education is increasing standardized test scores (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009). Top-down policies about schooling bring scripted curricula, data driven teaching practices, standardization, and little room for exploring new literacy practices. We hope that by introducing this creative play, toyhacking, and ilmmaking module to literacy coursework that pre-service teachers will ind value in the practices and create spaces in their future classrooms for expanded literacies. A majority of the university students, found that participation in the module legitimised an alternative conception of meaning making. Many of the university students completed this project with relections that expressed strong commitments to using maker and digital literacies in their future classrooms. Throughout this project, active engagement and collaborative participation was evident as the university students expressed their excitement about creating new characters and producing digital stories. Many of the pre-service teachers noted that they were initially sceptical about maker literacies and their place in literacy instruction. One student relected, Had I seen the makerspace before this class, I would have probably thought that it seemed out of place [in a college of education]. Ater the assignment, however, I realize its huge potential. his potential, for literacy instruction, student engagement, involvement, and collaboration, was referenced by a many of the participants, and oten was accompanied by relections of transformed understandings. Many students responded with positive comments, I think this project was a really great way to introduce a diferent kind of literacy learning. While I can only hope my future school has a space for my students to be this creative, I deinitely hope to do a ilm making process of some sort with them, hacked toys or not. I also think they will enjoy working together to come up with the funniest, scariest, silliest, or most clever movie they can think of. Creativity is essential, and this project hands the opportunity to use their imagination to them. 214 Bringing Maker Literacies to Early Childhood Education Image 3. These toys were hacked, but their gendered storyline remained untroubled. As university literacy instructors, we noticed increased laughter, smiles, and enhanced engagement from our students when we compared makerspace activities with the traditional literacy activities encountered throughout the semester. Multiple and fluid transformations of the toys’ texts occurred through maker literacies in toyhacking, collaborative storying, and media production. Pre-service teachers commented that the ability to create new toys without the traditional marginalizing efects was empowering and fun. Many students pointed out that the toys that they created relected their worlds more appropriately than the oten-exaggerated gender coding of pre-packaged toys. A participant explained, “I loved creating my own toy, that was gender neutral. I purposely chose a usual male dominated toy, a Flintstone dinosaur, and a Hello Kitty doll toy bank to work with”. 215 Jill Scott & Karen Wohlwend It is interesting to note that while the participants were encouraged to change the narratives of their toys by hacking them, we also found that the pre-service teachers relied on their own shared knowledge of popular media culture to recreate familiar stories for their characters. Oten, these remixed stories (Ito, 2007) did not look at the appropriated text critically, but instead reiied stereotypes. Pre-service teacher’s talk, jokes, and ilms tended to reproduce stereotypical toy texts, gendered roles, or popular culture tropes. For instance, one group of six participants developed a ilm that mimicked Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975). In planning for their ilm they relied on their shared media knowledge. Despite that the characters had been hacked, the ilm provided the basis for remixing a commonly-shared and socially understood text. Even though the characters were diferent, the gendered storyline was not troubled. Seeking popular culture and social media tropes peers would easily recognize was evident across many of the ilming groups in all classes during the literacy module. Groups gained inspiration for their ilms from popular music videos, damsel in distress tropes, and viral videos. But students can also hold fond memories and other emotional commitments to these shared texts, making them diicult for groups to revise. Children have strong passions for beloved characters and favourite stories that anchor their story making. One pre-service teacher observed this tension in remixing with his focus child, He did ind the (hacked) toy much more interesting, but even though it was a half horse/half man with a Peanuts head [Woodstock], he still automatically decided that the toy was in fact simply a weird-looking Batman. he story that he created was a classic story about Joker being a bad guy, and Batman saving the day. He was somewhat creative in explaining that Joker was “disguised,” and adding in the “sneaky Penguin” who was Joker’s accomplice, but in general, his story was very much like popular culture stories we had read about before. A great strength of this project is that the university students were able to actively consider their assigned elementary child’s media interests and funds of knowledge (Moll et al., 1992) as they were hacking their toys. In addition, they welcomed children’s toys and popular culture connections from home into their ield experience activities. Allowing 216 Bringing Maker Literacies to Early Childhood Education children’s favourite storylines and narratives into the classroom validated each child’s interests. he enthusiastic reactions from the children who participated in the project indicated the time spent creating digital ilms was fun, collaborative, productive, and engaging. Many pre-service teachers noted changes in their focus child’s participation level and in their engagement in story making. One university student wrote, My student had a blast ilming and wanted to make a part two to the video. She was so excited she asked if we could do it next time too. She liked telling stories and I feel like it allowed her to express her emotions. She loved that she was able to do impromptu and make up the story with no restrictions. Overall, I thought this was a great experience and I was able to learn new ideas from it. Another pre-service teacher noted, he move from traditional school literacies to newer ideas of literacies certainly engaged the student – he was enjoying himself but also working diligently to produce a story and a ilm. Importance for engaged learning in and out of school If literacy is a socio-cultural activity then we must provide students with opportunities to create meaning together. he image of children sitting alone, writing at desks needs to vanish. It is through projects like this one that invitations to co-construct can emerge and we can expand our notions of a solitary writer and reader into collaborative makers and producers. Maker literacies are best supported by playshop models, which expand reading and writing workshops to include play-enriched new literacies curricula. (Wohlwend, 2011, 2013; Wohlwend & Peppler, 2015). he playshop model empowers children to collaboratively produce with digital literacies and new technologies. hese literacies will require new kinds of teaching and learning by practitioners in and out of classrooms. While this article has documented learning in a university classroom and elementary school ield experience, the learning and teaching applies to out-of-school sites such as museums, arts, ater-school programs, and so on. Other practitioners could similarly 217 Jill Scott & Karen Wohlwend visit a makerspace, engage in toyhacking, and experience the power of collaborating creatively, producing digital stories, and exploring the potential of expanded literacies. We know it is critically important to ofer children engaging activities that matter to them. Maker literacies validate children’s interests and passions, promote student generated ideas and stories, and allow for co-creation of collaborative texts in socially signiicant ways. Playshops and maker literacies reveal the exciting possibilities in teaching for collaboration, creativity, storying, technology, and placing play at the core. Notes 1. Pre-kindergarten (also called Pre-K or PK) is a classroom-based preschool program for children at or below the age of ive in the United States, Canada and Turkey. An applicant for PK3 must be three years old by Sept. 30. https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Pre-kindergarten 2. All names are pseudonyms. References Cochran-Smith, Marilyn & Lytle, Susan L. (2009). Inquiry as Stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. New York: Teachers College Press. Forstater, Mark & White, Michael (Producers); Gilliam, Terry, & Jones, Terry (Directors). (1975). Monty Python and the Holy Grail (Motion Picture). United Kingdom, Michael White Productions, National Film Trustee Company, Python Pictures. Holland, Dorothy; Lachicotte, William; Skinner, Debra, & Cain, Carole (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Ito, Mizuko (2007). Technologies of the Childhood Imagination: Media Mixes, Hypersociality, and Recombinant Cultural Form. Médiamorphoses, 21 Available at http:// documents.irevues.inist.fr/handle/2042/23561. Medina, Carmen & Wohlwend, Karen (2014). Literacy, Play, and Globalization: Converging Imaginaries in Children’s Critical and Cultural Performances. New York: Routledge. Moll, Luis; Amanti, Cathy; Neff, Deborah, & Gonzalez, Norma (1992). Funds of Knowledge for Teaching: Using a Qualitative Approach to Connect Homes and Classrooms. heory into Practice 31:132-141 doi: 10.1080/00405849209543534. Peppler, Kylie & Bender, Sophia (2013). Maker Movement Spreads Innovation One Project at a Time. Phi Delta Kappan 95(3): 22-27 doi: 10.1177/003172171309500306. Rowsell, Jennifer & Pahl, Kate (2006). Sedimented Identities in Texts: Instances of Practice. Reading Research Quarterly 42(3): 388-404 doi: 10.1598/RRQ.42.3.3. Jill Scott, Doctoral Student, Literacy, Culture and Language Education, School of Education, Indiana University, USA, jillscot@indiana.edu Karen Wohlwend, Ph.D, Associate Professor, Literacy, Culture and Language Education, School of Education, Indiana University, USA, kwohlwen@indiana.edu 218 Bringing Maker Literacies to Early Childhood Education Scollon, Ronald &, Scollon, Suzanne (2004). Nexus analysis: Discourse and the Emerging Internet. Routledge, New York. Thiel, Jayne Johnson (2015). Bumblebees in Trouble: Embodied Literacies During Imaginative Superhero Play. Language Arts 93(1): 38-49 Vygotsky, Lev S. (1978). Mind in Society: he Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, Harvard University Press. Wohlwend, Karen; Buchholz, Beth & Medina, Carmen (In press for 2017). Playful Literacies and Practices of Making in Children’s Imaginaries. In Mills, Kathy; Stornaiuolo, Amy; Smith, Anna & Pandya, Jessica Zacher (Eds.), Handbook of Writing, Literacies, and Education in Digital Cultures. New York, NY: Routledge. Wohlwend, Karen; Buchholz, Beth; Wessel-Powell, Christy; Coggin, Linda, & Husbye, Nicholas (2013). Literacy Playshop: New Literacies, Popular Media, and Play in the Early Childhood Classroom. Teachers College Press, New York. Wohlwend, Karen (2009). Damsels in Discourse: Girls Consuming and Producing Gendered Identity Texts through Disney Princess Play. Reading Research Quarterly 44(1): 57-83 doi: 10.1598/rrq.44.1.3. Wohlwend, Karen (2011). Playing their Way into Literacies: Reading, Writing, and Childhood Classroom. Teachers College Press, New York. Wohlwend, Karen (2012). he Boys who would Be Princesses: Playing with Gender Identity intertexts in Disney Princess Transmedia. Gender and Education 24(6): 593-610 doi: 10.1080/09540253.2012.674495. Wohlwend, Karen (2014). Mediated Discourse Analysis: Tracking Discourse in Action, pp. 56-69 in Albers, Peggy; Holbrook, Teri & Flint, Amy Seely (Eds), New Methods in Literacy Research. New York: Routledge. Acknowledgement An earlier version of this article was originally published in the Spring 2016 issue of the Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications. he author would like to extend thanks to Kenn Gaither, associate professor and associate dean at Elon University, for his constant guidance throughout this process, without which this article could not have been written. he author also thanks the School of Communications and the many reviewers who have helped revise this article. 219 18 Meeting Change with Creativity Interview with Kirsten Drotner K irsten Drotner is chair of media studies at University of South Denmark (SDU) and founding director of a national programme Our Museum, and of DREAM (Danish Research Centre on Advanced Media Materials). She is a leading researcher on children’s and young people’s interactions with media at present and in the past, on the formation of creative, digital media literacies, and on users’ engagements with museums, libraries and similar cultural institutions1. Tell us how your interest (and approaches) regarding children, youth, media and creativity have developed over your career. How about the projects you are involved in at the moment? Early in my career I was involved in organizing academic collaboration in Denmark in the area of children’s culture. his was a time when the Scandinavian countries of Europe developed a lively interest in approaches to culture that would later be termed cultural studies, based on parallel developments in the UK. In Scandinavia, the particular interest in children’s culture tied in with welfarist notions of children as agents in their own lives, not merely as future citizens or denizens of the state. So, my interest in children’s and young people’s own cultural expressions and the creative processes behind them took inspiration from these trends. More speciically, I had already conducted historical research on juvenile media representations, resulting in a DPhil. in 1985 followed 221 Meeting Change with Creativity. Interview with Kirsten Drotner in Ilana Eleá and Lothar Mikos (Eds.) Young & Creative. Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life. Gothenburg: Nordicom Interview with Kirsten Drotner by a book three years later2. Having spent the best part of my twenties in historical archives, I wanted to turn to more contemporary media issues. So in line with the wider interests at the time in cultural agency, I chose to conduct a media-ethnographic study, not of dedicated fan culture, but of ‘ordinary’ young people’s video-making. I followed about 25 informants for about a year across a range of sites and settings in which they moved, and I analysed their video-making processes as well as their results3. his work allowed me to gain insight into the fascinating processes of creative collaboration; and that fascination has stayed with me, even if I have worked on many other media projects since then. Naturally, the pervasive uptake of digital media technologies that ofer immediate and easy options for shaping and sharing all sorts of images, sound and text have turned what 25 years ago seemed like a niche research area into a key concern. I have just inished a project, conducted with my colleague Heidi Philipsen, on children’s ilm-making practices and the didactics needed to further these practices4. hat work has made it absolutely evident that today children’s digital content creation is at the core of exercising their freedom of expression. But it has equally documented that children are not digital natives who already know how to exercise this freedom. hey need sustained training to Image 1. Making stop-motion film ofers an easy pathway to productive media and information literacy. 222 Meeting Change with Creativity competently use what Uwe Hasebrink and colleagues in the major EU Kids Online project have called the digital ‘ladder of opportunities’5. While children naturally have a voice, they must learn how to apply digital media to shape its modes of expression so that others may hear and understand, even if these others choose to disagree or reject the result. While 25 years ago I studied young people’s media production as a form of peer production within a leisured participatory culture, our current research has illuminated that today children’s digital content creation is critically about securing pathways to their citizenship. “Leisure is hard work” is the title of one of your articles, published in 2008. Could you explain how you came to this conclusion? he title is really the result of two key indings in our studies on digital content creation. First, we have documented that there is a mismatch between young media users’ technical options of production and their abilities to exercise these options in such a way that others understand the result. Many have the technical skills needed, but fewer know how to communicate with media in terms of, for example, narrative, framing or editing; and surprisingly few have a clue about the contexts of power in which their results circulate. hey may know about the privacy settings of their Facebook proiles, but they are at a loss to understand Facebook’s platform power over their data. Second, we have seen that school provides very little in terms of systematically training students’ digital content creation, despite the fact that this training is at the core of 21st-century skills. School, in Denmark as elsewhere, is very focused on reproductive learning (reading, math), rather than on the forms of productive learning that are involved in digital processes of creation. Young media users primarily train these creative resources in their leisure time – hence the title. If you could send a message to parents and teachers about children’s and youth’s media creative production, what would you say? What do they need to be aware of and/or inspired by? We all need to rethink the purpose of media and information literacy in view of the resources needed in the 21st century. In the past, much efort has focused on ofering students critical skills of representation, for example spotting ideological bias and marketing eforts. More re223 Interview with Kirsten Drotner Image 2. Sharing the fun of production is a serious matter, even for very young children. cently, we have witnessed an upsurge in a technology-driven emphasis on information skills in terms of handling hardware and teaching students how to code. When it comes to children’s and young people’s own media output, not only third-sector organisations and school but also parents are keen to guide the young about what (and whom) to avoid online. Given the high-proile and very tragic cases of harm, this is a natural irst step. Naturally, children need critical awareness and there is nothing wrong in promoting coding. But the pervasive focus on technological skills and on online avoidance very easily implies that adults are sidestepping the key perspective of how we may guide children’s freedom to express themselves online. We need a better balance in teaching about media obstacles and options here. Parents or school authorities, who may not be persuaded by such lufy democratic arguments, may take note of a report issued by the 224 Meeting Change with Creativity World Economic Forum in 2016 and stating that of the generation populating schools today 65 per cent will hold future jobs not yet perceived or invented6. To prepare for such dramatic changes, creative skills are needed by all, not merely a select creative class. For without creativity, no innovation, and no training in meeting change with a capacity to act on that change. And where better to start than by advancing children’s and young people’s creative media competences. hey have the resources; they already apply these in their leisure time. But mobiles and tablets are still oten banned in the classroom as distracting gadgets diverting attention from the main elements of teaching. We need to turn the tables. Notes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. http://indresearcher.sdu.dk/portal/en/persons/kirsten-drotner(b0d73222-74a5417c-b313-0bccaaf812fa)/cv.html?id=79386239 Drotner, Kirsten (1988). English children and their magazines, 1752-1945. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Drotner, Kirsten (1989). Girl meets boy: Aesthetic production, reception, and gender identity, Cultural Studies 3, (2): 208-225. Drotner, Kirsten (1991). At skabe sig – selv: unge, æstetik, pædagogik. Copenhagen: Gyldendal. Rev. ed. 1995. Drotner, Kirsten & Philipsen, Heidi (2016). Udvikling af tværfaglig ilmpædagogik: Kreativitet, kreation og kollaboration [Developing interdisciplinary ilm pedagogy: Creativity, creation and collaboration]. Odense: Kulturregion Fyn. See: http:// ilmportalfyn.dk/ny-forskningsrapport-udvikling-af-tvaerfaglig-ilmpaedagogik/ Philipsen, Heidi & Drotner, Kirsten (2017). Praksiskatalog: Produktiv læring med ilm i dansk og de praktisk-musiske fag. Hvordan udvikles praksis? [Best practice: Productive learning through film in Danish and cultural subjects]. Odense: Kulturregion Fyn. See: http://ilmportalfyn.dk/praksiskatalog-om-ilmundervisning-til-skolerne/ Hasebrink, Uwe; Görz, Anke; Haddon, Leslie; Kalmus, Veronika; Livingstone, Sonia. et al. (2011). Patterns of risk and safety online: In-depth analysis from the EU Kids Online Survey of 9- to 16-year-olds and their parents in 25 European countries. London: London School of Economics. See: http://www.lse.ac.uk/media@lse/research/EUKidsOnline/EU%20Kids%20II%20(2009-11)/EUKidsOnlineIIReports/ D5%20Patterns%20of%20risk.pdf he future of jobs: Employment, skills and workforce strategy for the fourth industrial revolution (2016). World Economic Forum. 225 Publications from the International Clearinghouse on Children, Youth and Media Yearbooks Dafna Lemish & Maya Götz (Eds.) Beyond the Stereotypes? Images of Boys and Girls, and their Consequences. Yearbook 2017 Magda Abu-Fadil, Jordi Torrent, Alton Grizzle (Eds.) Opportunities for Media and Information Literacy in the Middle East and North Africa. Yearbook 2016 Sirkku Kotilainen, Reijo Kupiainen (Eds.) Reflections on Media Education Futures. Contributions to the Conference Media Education Futures in Tampere, Finland 2014. Yearbook 2015 Ilana Eleá (Ed.) Agentes e Vozes. Um Panorama da Mídia-Educação no Brasil, Portugal e Espanha. Yearbook 2014. Portuguese/Spanish Edition. Cecilia von Feilitzen & Johanna Stenersen (Eds): Young People, Media and Health. Risks and Rights. Yearbook 2014. English Edition. Thomas Tute, Norbert Wildermuth, Anne Sofie Hansen-Skovmoes, Winnie Mitullah (Eds): Speaking Up and Talking Back? Media Empowerment and Civic Engagement among East and Southern African Youth. Yearbook 2012/2013. Cecilia von Feilitzen, Ulla Carlsson & Catharina Bucht (Eds): New Questions, New Insights, New Approaches. Contributions to the Research Forum at the World Summit on Media for Children and Youth 2010. Yearbook 2011. Ulla Carlsson (Ed.) Children and Youth in the Digital Media Culture. From a Nordic Horizon. Yearbook 2010. The Creative YouTubers Thomas Tute & Florencia Enghel (Eds): Youth Engaging With the World. Media, Communication and Social Change. Yearbook 2009. Norma Pecora, Enyonam Osei-Hwere & Ulla Carlsson (Eds): African Media, African Children. Yearbook 2008. Karin M. Ekström & Birgitte Tute (Eds): Children, Media and Consumption. On the Front Edge. Yearbook 2007. Ulla Carlsson & Cecilia von Feilitzen (Eds): In the Service of Young People? Studies and Reflections on Media in the Digital Age. Yearbook 2005/2006. Cecilia von Feilitzen (Ed.): Young People, Soap Operas and Reality TV. Yearbook 2004. Somewhere around 300-400 hours of video is uploaded every minute on the immensely popular platform of YouCecilia von Feilitzen & Catharina Bucht: Outlooks on Children and Media. Child Rights, Media Trends, Media Research, Media Literacy, Child Tube. In this section, authors present examples of videoParticipation, Declarations. Yearbook 2001. blogging, otherwise as invlogging, common feature Cecilia von Feilitzen & Ulla Carlssonknown (Eds): Children the New MediaaLandscape. Games, Pornography, Perceptions. Yearbook 2000. Cecilia von Feilitzen & Ulla Carlsson (Eds): Children and Media. Image, Education, Participation. among viewers. Some vloggers have become world famousYearbook 1999. Ulla Carlsson & Cecilia von Feilitzen (Eds): Children and Media Violence. Yearbook 1998. through their presence on the screen, some of them are still Other publications mostly known among their friends and family. Cecilia von Feilitzen & Ulla Carlsson (Eds): Promote or Protect? Perspectives on Media Literacy and Media Regulations. Yearbook 2003. Cecilia von Feilitzen & Ulla Carlsson (Eds): Children, Young People and Media Globalisation. Yearbook 2002. Ilana Eleá (Ed.) Agents and Voices. A Panorama of Media Education in Brazil, Portugal and Spain, 2015. Jagtar Singh, Alton Grizzle, Sin Joan Yee & Sherri Hope Culver (Eds): MILID Yearbook 2015. Media and Information Literacy for the Sustainable Development Goals Sherri Hope Culver & Paulette Kerr (Eds): MILID Yearbook 2014. Global Citizenship in a Digital World. Catharina Bucht & Eva Harrie: Young People in the Nordic Digital Media Culture. A Statistical Overview, 2013. Ulla Carlsson & Sherri Hope Culver (Eds): MILID Yearbook 2013. Media and Information Literacy and Intercultural Dialogue. Catharina Bucht & Maria Edström (Eds): Youth Have Their Say on Internet Governance. Nordic Youth Forum at EuroDig, Stockholm June 2012. Sirkku Kotilainen & Sol-Britt Arnolds-Granlund (Eds): Media Literacy Education. Nordic Perspectives, in cooperation with the Finnish Society on Media Education, 2010. María Dolores Souza & Patricio Cabello (Eds): The Emerging Media Toddlers, 2010. Young People in the European Digital Media Landscape. A Statistical Overview with an Introduction by Sonia Livingstone and Leslie Haddon. 2009 (For the EU conference ‘Promoting a Creative Generation’, July 2009) Cecilia von Feilitzen: Influences of Mediated Violence. A Brief Research Summary, 2009. Ulla Carlsson, Samy Tayie, Geneviève Jacquinot-Delaunay & José Manuel Pérez Tornero (Eds): Empowerment Through Media Education. An Intercultural Dialogue, in co-operation with UNESCO, Dar Graphit and the Mentor Association, 2008. Ulla Carlsson (Ed.): Regulation, Awareness, Empowerment. Young People and Harmful Media Content in the Digital Age, in co-operation with UNESCO, 2006. Maria Jacobson: Young People and Gendered Media Messages, 2005. Simon Egenfeldt-Nielsen & Jonas Heide Smith: Playing with Fire. How do Computer Games Influence the Player?, 2004. This book YOUNG & CREATIVE – Digital Technologies Empowering Children in Everyday Life aims to catch diferent examples where children and youth have been active and creative by their own initiative, driven by intrinsic motivation, personal interests and peer relations. We want to show the opportunities of digital technologies for creative processes of children and young people. The access to digital technology and its growing convergence has allowed young people to experiment active roles as cultural producers. Participation becomes a keyword when “consumers take media into their own hands”. Digital technologies ofer the potential of diferent forms of participatory media culture, and finally creative practices. The Creative YouTubers YOUNG and CREATIVE is a mix of research articles, interviews and case studies. The target audience of this book is students, professionals and researchers working in the field of education, communication, children and youth studies, new literacy studies and media and information literacy. Somewhere around 300-400 hours of video is uploaded every minute on the immensely popular platform of YouTube.Eleá, In this authors of Brazil, video-is former scientific coorIlana PhDsection, in Education frompresent PUC-Rioexamples de Janeiro, dinator at The International Children, Youth and Media, Nordicom, blogging, otherwise knownClearinghouse as vlogging, a on common feature Sweden. among viewers. Some vloggers have become world famous through theirProfessor presenceof onTelevision the screen, some of them are still Lothar Mikos, Studies, Department of Media Studies, Filmunimostly known among their friends and family. versität Babelsberg KONRAD WOLF, Potsdam, Germany, and Honorary Professsor at University of Gothenburg Box 713, SE 405 30 Göteborg, Sweden Telephone +46 31 786 00 00 • Fax + 46 31 786 46 55 9 789187 957857 ISBN 978-91-87957-85-7 University of International Business and Economy, Beijing, China. E-mail info@nordicom.gu.se www.nordicom.gu.se

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS

Log In

Young & Creative

Young & Creative

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS