Social networks, Creative industries, Innovation systems,

This paper presents a rationale for distinguishing between notions of cultural and creative industries which has implications for theory, industry and policy analysis. I do this from the standpoint of a researcher and analyst and also from a position of a corporate involvement in a substantial project to grow and diversify a regional economy through the development of its creative industries. This project is a ‘creative industries precinct’ in inner suburban Brisbane involving my university, Queensland University of Technology, the Queensland state government through its Department of State Development, a variety of industry players, and retail and property developers. There is theoretical purchase in distinguishing the two terms, in part to put further flesh on the bones of claims about the nature of the knowledge-based economy and its relation to culture and creativity. Shifts in the nature of the industries usually described by the terms also need to be captured effectively, as do different policy regimes that come into play as regulation of and support for cultural and creative industries.

No abstract

In attempting to break with a ‘fall from grace’ narrative that may structure analysis of the rapid professionalization and monetization of previously amateur online video content on the main global platform, YouTube, this article outlines histories of key institutions in the new screen ecology as outcomes of the increased interpenetration of very different, often clashing industry cultures. Google/YouTube, Apple’s iTunes, Netflix, Amazon, Yahoo! and Facebook (‘NoCal’) are largely Internet ‘pure-play’ companies, whilst Hollywood’s incumbents (‘SoCal’) practice time-honoured mass media and premium content strategies. The ‘history of the present’ of the new screen ecology is the history of the clash of these cultures. The less than 10-year history of Google’s YouTube can be written as a history of Google seeking to come to terms with the conditions of possibility for entertainment, content and talent development from its base as an IT company dedicated to scale, automation, permanent beta, rapid prototyping and iteration. These efforts reflect both continuities and contestations with traditional media models, particularly business models. As emerging intermediaries in the middle of the convergent space between NoCal and SoCal, multichannel networks’ (MCNs’) placement sees them needing to innovate on both the NoCal and SoCal side. On the former side, MCNs are attempting to provide value-added services superior to basic YouTube analytics, with programmatics and pioneering attempts at management of scale and volume. On the latter side, they are managing a quite different class of entry- to mid-level talent, who bring successful audience development and clear ideas about the roots of their success with them. The new screen ecology is a space of unimagined scale and scope of flourishing online creativity and culture, which is at the same time turbulent and precarious for creators and MCNs alike.

This article develops an analytical framework to understand the modes of address of native-to-online content types (gameplay, do-it-yourself (DIY) beauty, personality vlogging). These types of content differ sharply from established screen entertainment and are constituted from intrinsically interactive audience-centricity and appeal to authenticity and community in a commercialising space which we call ‘social media entertainment’. The article offers a revisionist analysis of the shaping and disciplining of brand culture through the twinned discourses of authenticity and community. The significance of social media entertainment lies in that, for a great many especially young viewers, this is what television is, now.