SubscribeMedia Convergence
Posted in MCWC on November 30th, 2007. By Manuel Castells.
Convergence is the buzz word in the global media industry nowadays. But its meaning is unclear, and its use is often misleading.
For most media companies, convergence refers to the technological synergy between various delivery platforms of content. In this view, digitization allows the same audiovisual product to be distributed in different formats via open TV; pay per view, cable or satellite TV; the Internet; dvd and video; mobile phones, radio (in the case of audio); podcasting, videoconsoles, books, magazines, and any support platform that can be formatted to specific versions of a given product.
Convergence is at the roots of the movement of concentration of media production and distribution in a few corporate conglomerates that control 75% of audiovisual products that are globally distributed. Although most of these mega-corporations are based in a few countries, they extend their global reach via networks of collaboration with media companies in every area and country in the world. Globalized media are structured as a network of networks.
Technological convergence is often conceived as the march toward the unified set-top box that would connect all the delivery platforms in a single, centralized, remote control command running the multiple networks that would flow to the hypercommunicated home. Microsoft has pursued this media El Dorado for a long time, and lost millions of dollars in their pursuit. Even its recent alliance with ATT has not yielded the expected results. Neither it seems that the mobile phone will be the multiple delivery platform of multimedia on the run in the near future. This is both because of technical reasons, of legal reasons, and because of the specificity of differential contexts of various communication practices. Indeed, rather than convergence we are witnessing the divergence of delivery platforms to support convergent content. This is the fundamental reason for the growing concentration of media business: they aim at generating economies of synergy, and not just economies of scale, by consolidating content and diversifying delivery through their control of different mediums.
But there is a third meaning of convergence that appears to capture better the fundamental transformation of the media world. This is what Henry Jenkins, in his insightful book “Convergence Culture” (New York University Press, 2006) defines as “the flow of content across multiple media platforms, the cooperation between multiple media industries, and the migratory behavior of media audiences who will go almost anywhere in search of the kind of entertainment experiences they want” (page 2). In Jenkins’ analysis the decisive trend is the growing importance of the media consumers to produce and distribute content in the media networks, either as individuals or, most significantly, as networked communities that collaborate in production processes or in the remixing of media products available in the multiple platforms of media delivery. Under these circumstances, the critical convergence is between the top down production and the grass roots production of the media content in a recurrent interactive process. Moreover, without cooperation between media business and active-media consumers, the media culture does not connect to innovative consumers, ultimately disconnecting itself from its fast changing audience. On the other hand, without connecting to the mainstream media, consumer-producers of media content remain isolated in mico-cultural communes, losing their appeal beyond their own circle. As Jenkins writes: “The power of the grassroots media es that it diversifies; the power of broadcast media is that it amplifies” (p. 257)
The issue raised by the intertwined processes of convergence of content and potential convergence of corporate production and grassroots production of content is which one of the two will ultimately control the outcome of the production process. Because if it is true that media consumers are increasingly empowered in the production of content,and gratified by their ability to influence the broadcast media, on the other hand, the net result could well be that they are expropriated from the value added of their creativity without compensation. Furthermore, the regime of property rights protects the copyright of corporate media while leaving unprotected the use value oriented production of content by savvy consumers.
In other words, technological divergence, and content convergence cannot operate only on the basis of the intelligence and good will of the corporations, playing both the old game of property rights and the new game of tapping on consumers-producers’ creativity. A reformed legal and institutional environment based on the principles of fair use of produced content and sharing of commercial profits between the diverse communities of producers must be established, globally and locally, to avoid a new round of cultural enclosure of people’s creativity.
2 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
I agree with the conclussion. Which is neither new, nor only applicable to the question at hand. It’s not technology what determines society. Chantes in problems, theories, ideologies and institutions are at least as important.
The question is: if confussion about the meaning of convergence is widespread; and if a mental frame like “convergence is the result of technologial progress; therefore it’s good” prevails,
and if large and well established corporations are faster than grassroots to capture social innovation (i.e. Murdoch with MySpace),
what are the chances of this needed reform of legal and institutional environment? Which kind of forces and/or events would prompt them?
Comment by ruizdequerol on December 6, 2007
Estimado Prof.Castells.
Soy Venezolana, profesor en en la escuela de comunicación social de la Universidad Arturo Michelena de Valencia.Venezuela. Estoy miuy interesada en contactarlo ya que estoy tutireando un libro sobre la sociedad de la información. Me gustaria que usted me mandara a mi correo una dirección de e-mail o si es posible su telefono para contactar una entrevista, que seria de incalculable valor para nosotros. Este medio es uno de los que seleccioné como posibilidad para que usted lo lea y me responda en efecto. Muy agradecida de su atención. Reciba mis sentimientos de profundo respeto y admiración.
Atentamente Prof Osdalis vera
overave@yahoo.com
Comment by Osdalis Vera (Venezuela) on March 21, 2008