I found your blog titled ‘Think not what the internet can do for you..’. I especially find your exploration of the term “pro-am’ entertaining, by using a fancy word for nerd (in a positive light). I also find it intersting that such a small percentage of users actually contribute to blogs and other New Media when it is such a readily available outlet. The idea of using facebook for education purposes as well as scoial purposes provides a useful link between different new media spaces. I think that even if someone is not an expert in a particular field they can contribute from their own personal experiences that may be relevant to the topic. By doing this, they would contribute an interesting perspective on any given issue. Like you said, the internet is not merely for data processing but it provides many more social and educational purposes. In my opinion i felt that the internet is not used nearly to its potential by the general public. There are so many things that are relevant, useful and just interesting to see and do on the internet, i think it is time new media started to expose these activities.

The four points you have listed, I believe, are all equally important in assessing content on Wikipedia. It is just as important for contributors to not come to their own conclusions and cite their sources as it is important for content to be continually in the process of evaluation and editing by the community to enable better quality material to be produced. The second and third points that you make are also valid. Articles with neutral points of view are necessary for unbiased content to be produced. Also, Wikipedia is a leader in providing up-to-date and “live” knowledge, which is especially valuable in researching current events, for example the 2005 Boxing Day tsunami. You also made a point about checking the history and discussion tabs in our evaluation of Wikipedia articles – a very useful tip!

Thanks for a very insightful look into Wikipedia Mimi!

The Threadless example is an interesting one in that it seems to be a very product driven model, where only the best will do? An Australian Idol for designers almost. I have seen another example of this type of DIY culture and design you may be interested in called Redbubble.com. It allows anyone to submit work and sell it in a range of formats, without any mediation or judgment. Meaning any (visual/writing) creative artifact can become a product if a produser intends to acquire it.

Can you think of any other industry aplications for this type of business model?

The advertising industry could benefit from a DIY-culture model, a place for us to maybe gain some experience and build our portfolios? It could offer business the ability to access good quality PR/Adv/Mktng for a fraction of a regular agency cost.

I would agree with the notion that Adv/PR will continue to exsist, however the exclusive/expensive nature of the industry will become a thing of the past with produsage and user-generated activities becoming more viable and effective. Thanks again for your post.

Ultimately if PR wants to adapt and stay relevant in this new age of participatory media, they really need to go back to basics, inherently as the name suggests, PR is about managing relationships and relating to your publics. I think in the past the industry has tried to focus on measurable and evaluative tactics, when in fact these often miss the point. I believe that whilst the bottom line is important and measurable results , PR needs to take on a few characteristics of produsage, in that a firm needs to adopt open source communication, communal evaluation, fluid heterarchies and the notion of unfinished artefacts. Involving consumers in more of a produser role, will ensure a two-way symmetrical flow of information which is at the crux of produsage, as opposed to a simple feedback loop, two-way asymmetrical etc.

PR like any industry is always evolving and I thankyou for shedding light on how we, as future PR professionals, can evolve with and together shape the future of the industry we love!

The more significant thing is that it requires to use or apply new media stuff for achievements. We talked about Obama and Kevin’s online campaign. I think they are good examples about how necessary to approach the internet users to be successful. Especially the fact that Obama raised half billion was really a sign of using new media.

Meanwhile, as the media audiences are more interactive and flexible to use new media. It is very challenging for media producers. They have to improve their products associating with the increasing requirement from the audiences. It’s hard for us , media students, to do it well. Yet we have to follow the produsage for business, study and media work.

While you argue that these DIY produser communities will have a significantly greater responsibility for advertising, marketing and of course creating their products, the skills of PR practitioners such as relationship management, media relations, strategic speech, persuasive writing and corporate communication are essential to the survival of any organisation. Similar to Jeremiah Owyang’s prediction that PR practitioners will represent communities as opposed to brands, I believe the role of PR will be to work closely alongside DIY communities and consult them on issues and campaigns as a collaborative communal process in the same way their products are created.

I agree that PR companies will soon be representing communities rather than individual brands. PR is not my professional interest, however it’s interesting to note the various sectors that have begun to be affected by the produsage movement, as well as citizen journalism. Thanks for the great read.