Digital Creativity Discussion
This discussion comes from "Digital Storytelling: Capturing Lives, Creating Community," by Joe Lambert - Chapter 10 "Distribution, Ethics and the Politics of Engagement"
Chapter Summary
Ethics (general)
Lambert opens the chapter with the quote, "Do no harm."
He goes on to say, "what starts as well-meaning intention becomes a minefiled of unintended consequences" (117). Lambert explains that some social groups were created with good intentions - to protect people, but become power struggles have emerged and have created a vulnerability.
Ethics (in art)
Lambert brings up the idea of "first voice"
"First Voice" - In artistic collaborations with local communities, we should strive that people should speak for themselves, and as often as possible that gatherings of storytellers should be facilitated within the community, by community members, for the general benefit of the community (as opposed to an outside audience)" (117). Lambert continues, "... the act of appropriating someone else's voice diminishes the person who appropriated the story, in much the same way it diminishes the person's for whom the story belongs." Basically what Lambert is saying is that the person who wrote the story (or created the artwork) is the best person to explain that story. If that person is not available, the next best person to tell that story is someone within that community.
Artistic Control and Expression
Lambert recalls at the end of one of his three-week workshops, one of his students wanted to make sure her work was completely deleted. Not understanding why his student would want to do this, he asked her why. The student explained that the artwork was for herself. Lambert, as an instructor, was used to encouraging students to publish their work, and struggled with the idea of a student wanting to erase all evidence of the work that was crated. After some consideration, Lambert came to the conclusion, that as an artist, his student (or any artist) should be in control of where, when, and the audience as part of the artistic expression. This control includes whether or not the work is ever publicly displayed.
Ethics in a Digital World
With easy access to the internet, the distribution, sharing and downloading of digital media on many platforms, ethical treatment has been lost. Lambert says, "Those partaking in [social media use] may have little experience in medial engagement, and little familiarity with approaches to ethics" (120).
Lambert reminds readers that ethical guidelines were based on a professional expectation that they would not abuse power. This include using cuts and edits to skew quotes, or take them out of context. Media does not have the right to put words into people's mouths.
Today, social media users have become a psudo-news reporters. Without professional ethics training, blogs, posts and videos can quickly become "propaganda, rumor, and slander" (122), without proper fact checking.
Mind Map
(www.mindmup.com software used)
Thoughts and Questions
In the communication era, images, books, and music are popular forms of media that social media users historically have ethically abused. From personal experience working at a copy shop, there isn't a widespread understanding of copyright (which is part of the ethical treatment of artwork, artists and intellectual property rights). The majority I've encountered believe anything found through a google search is free game to use. With the boom of social media, how can we find a way to better police ourselves to use ethical judgement when posting, using, or reposting digital content? How can we enforce the "Do No Harm" principle of Ethics in a world of social media, when anonymity in various online mediums allows for such harm?
References
Chapter Summary
Ethics (general)
Lambert opens the chapter with the quote, "Do no harm."
He goes on to say, "what starts as well-meaning intention becomes a minefiled of unintended consequences" (117). Lambert explains that some social groups were created with good intentions - to protect people, but become power struggles have emerged and have created a vulnerability.
Ethics (in art)
Lambert brings up the idea of "first voice"
"First Voice" - In artistic collaborations with local communities, we should strive that people should speak for themselves, and as often as possible that gatherings of storytellers should be facilitated within the community, by community members, for the general benefit of the community (as opposed to an outside audience)" (117). Lambert continues, "... the act of appropriating someone else's voice diminishes the person who appropriated the story, in much the same way it diminishes the person's for whom the story belongs." Basically what Lambert is saying is that the person who wrote the story (or created the artwork) is the best person to explain that story. If that person is not available, the next best person to tell that story is someone within that community.
Artistic Control and Expression
Lambert recalls at the end of one of his three-week workshops, one of his students wanted to make sure her work was completely deleted. Not understanding why his student would want to do this, he asked her why. The student explained that the artwork was for herself. Lambert, as an instructor, was used to encouraging students to publish their work, and struggled with the idea of a student wanting to erase all evidence of the work that was crated. After some consideration, Lambert came to the conclusion, that as an artist, his student (or any artist) should be in control of where, when, and the audience as part of the artistic expression. This control includes whether or not the work is ever publicly displayed.
Ethics in a Digital World
With easy access to the internet, the distribution, sharing and downloading of digital media on many platforms, ethical treatment has been lost. Lambert says, "Those partaking in [social media use] may have little experience in medial engagement, and little familiarity with approaches to ethics" (120).
Lambert reminds readers that ethical guidelines were based on a professional expectation that they would not abuse power. This include using cuts and edits to skew quotes, or take them out of context. Media does not have the right to put words into people's mouths.
Today, social media users have become a psudo-news reporters. Without professional ethics training, blogs, posts and videos can quickly become "propaganda, rumor, and slander" (122), without proper fact checking.
Mind Map
(www.mindmup.com software used)
Thoughts and Questions
In the communication era, images, books, and music are popular forms of media that social media users historically have ethically abused. From personal experience working at a copy shop, there isn't a widespread understanding of copyright (which is part of the ethical treatment of artwork, artists and intellectual property rights). The majority I've encountered believe anything found through a google search is free game to use. With the boom of social media, how can we find a way to better police ourselves to use ethical judgement when posting, using, or reposting digital content? How can we enforce the "Do No Harm" principle of Ethics in a world of social media, when anonymity in various online mediums allows for such harm?
References
Lambert, J. (2013). Digital storytelling: Capturing lives, creating community. New York, NY: Routledge.
No comments:
Post a Comment