Jonathon Hutchinson

In my “post-confirmation era”, I have found some time to stop, take stock and critically reflect on what I am researching. The confirmation process encouraged me to focus on what my research questions are, conduct a preliminary analysis, and construct my first grounded theoretical framework. With all of that info and solid foundation to build from, I am entering into a reflexive stage to examine why I should indeed research Pool. Below is my rationale, highlighting the departure point for further investigation into the role of the community manager.

The changing media landscape suggests participants are increasingly engaging in media content production within institutions (Banks 2009; Benkler 2006; Burgess & Green 2009; Jenkins 2006). In the current media landscape described as “highly volatile and altered” due to “the explosion of Web 2.0 services and associated user-generated content” (Cunningham & Turner 2010: 2), the role of the public service broadcaster is under examination (Born 2005; Burns 2004; Debrett 2010; Martin 2007). Mark Scott, the Managing Director of the ABC, asked the same question during his 2009 Commonwealth Broadcaster Association lecture. His line of enquiry was “In a digital age of plenty, what role can the public broadcaster play?” (Scott 2009).

The interrogation of the ABC’s role in the future of media broadcasting was also addressed by the Department of Broadband, Communication and Digital Economy’s report ABC and SBS: Towards a Digital Future stating “new digital technologies are radically changing the fundamentals of broadcasting and media” (DBCDE 2008). This enquiry prompted scholarly research to define how the Australian national broadcaster might position itself to work with digital communication technology. Terry Flew (et al) (2008) cite this as an opportunity for PSBs “to enhance and renew their Charter obligation as and social innovation remit through public service media through user-created content strategies, particularly in their provision of online service” (Flew et al. 2008: 2). This response brings into scope the significance of ABC platforms encouraging user created content.

The ABC responded with the Strategic Plan 2009 – 2012 which offers two solutions to re-position the institution within the evolving digital sphere (ABC 2009). The reaction also reflects recent scholarly work on the role of the PSB from a global perspective (Debrett 2010). Firstly, the ABC is drawing on the deployment of new media platforms to provide additional avenues to distribute media. Secondly, the institution is ensuring the national broadcaster strengthens it use of technologies to engage audiences in new ways (Debrett 2010). One example of this strategy has been the introduction of tools such as iView developed by ABC Innovation. The continuously fragmenting audience has the option to consume its media on numerous platforms in an ‘on demand’ model – a model consistent with media trends (Deuze, Bruns & Neuberger 2007).

Within the creative sector, an increase in user activity in ABC spaces such as Artspost, Reface, and Pool establishes traction with their communities of interest (ABC 2010). Users begin to contribute content to the public broadcaster for a number of reasons – to be part of a media community or to have their work broadcast on the ABC (Foley et al. 2009). The increase in these grass roots, UGC activities demonstrate greater interaction between online communities and the ABC.  Policy development and production techniques have evolved to incorporate new models of user created content. Models such as these have been termed co-creation activities (Banks 2002; Burgess 2009).

Online community negotiation can be examined in fine detail through Pool’s core base of creative practitioners contributing media to the ABC. Some media is used for professionally produced broadcast programs, some for training and education purposes, whilst some media is refined to exhibit in public urban spaces. However, these opportunities of co-creative collaborations between ABC experts and “prosumers” (Toffler 1980) may be countered by arising tensions within the management of institutional online communities. The platform, and therefore the content, is governed by Pool’s Terms and Conditions developed in conjunction with the ABC’s Editorial Policies (ABC 2009) and the ABC Act (1983) (ABC 1983). Often, as indicated through discussions with ABC legal representatives, users are not aware of the implications of ABC Editorial Policies. Content is generally uploaded from the user’s perspective and is not always compliant with management guidelines and policy documents of the ABC. Pool is challenging the management of institutional communities through user-generated creative production. These challenges present as case-by-case scenarios involving considerable ABC legal discussion; a task monitored by the community manager. Fundamentally the community manager at ABC Pool is situated at, and at times facilitates, the negotiation between actors.