1. GOAL: To Think More Like Media Producers and Less Like Media Consumers
1.1. ACCESS
1.1.1. Advantage: EASE. Technological advances allows means of exhibition & distribution.
1.1.2. Issue: SATURATION. Community Media needs to avoid being drowned by the sea of individual voices now across the digital airwaves.
1.2. UNDERSTAND
1.2.1. Advantage: Teaches participants to work as a team, think creatively about themselves and their surroundings, look for positives and analyze the negatives.
1.2.2. Issue: Issues can arise if community media participants do not develop a keen sense of "who we are," "what we do," and "why we do it"
1.3. CREATE
1.3.1. Advantage: Create communications in a variety of contexts.
1.3.2. Issue: Mainstream mass media is becoming more localized and tailored online to look like the same alternative media they were reacting against.
2. Potentials of Impact
2.1. How to Measure Impact
2.1.1. is problematic and complex.
2.1.2. Uses demographic data and statistics
2.1.2.1. used by funders to justify investing in CM
2.1.2.2. provides evidence of the positive impact funding had on community.
2.2. Dependent on Funding
2.2.1. Fragmented working landscape
2.2.2. Work can pile up while the capacity shrinks
2.2.3. Forever trying to stay afloat financially.
2.2.4. Each project needs a built-in structure that attempts to maximize sustainability for the participants to elongate moments of impact and positive experience.
2.2.5. Channel ZerO, Stage 2 type projects are rapidly growing funding interest.
2.3. Technology
2.3.1. Allows activities to be widespread
2.3.2. Increasingly varies the approach and motivation
2.4. Digital Communities
2.4.1. The building up of digital communities within geographic ones is the way to keep people connected, though at the cost of actual civic participation(DeZengotita, 2005)
2.4.2. Broader access to information than any other time in history
2.4.3. One step closer to having the "means of representation" (domestic & non-professional level)
2.5. Audience
2.5.1. Consider and involve audience
2.5.2. Building strong working relationships with partner agencies is key.
2.6. Reassess
2.6.1. Step Back
2.6.2. What we do?
2.6.3. Why we do it?
2.6.4. How we do it?
2.6.5. Measure impact & potential
3. Potential Challenges
3.1. Web 2.0
3.1.1. has the outward appearance of access, participation, and democratization
3.1.1.1. Google
3.1.1.1.1. is reportedly the world's largest media corporation
3.1.1.1.2. bought YouTube for 1.65 billion in 10/06
3.1.2. Same economic base as traditional mass media
3.1.3. just provides access to platforms in a galaxy of a million and one platforms
3.1.4. a new face on an old problem.
3.2. Policy Decisions & Changes in Political Landscape
3.2.1. Evidence of value and impact is needed to ensure the longevity of CM.
3.3. Authenticity
3.3.1. To agitate mainstream services
3.3.2. Encourage participation in civil society and decision making
3.3.3. To empower authentic voices and narratives in mainstream media.
3.3.4. Representation
3.3.4.1. Right relation to the right audience to enable effective change in one's community
4. Structural Framework
4.1. Gives Access to Production Equipment, Skills & Empowers Participants Groups via
4.1.1. Educational Activity
4.1.1.1. Involves the pedagogic or sociological process of learning when making media messages.
4.1.1.2. PURPOSE
4.1.1.2.1. Direct motivation is to inspire the participants to become aspiring creative media professionals.
4.1.1.3. RESULT
4.1.1.3.1. Feeds community media industry with content produced via educational activities.
4.1.1.4. ISSUE
4.1.1.4.1. Participants have different motivations and do not always seek a career in media.
4.1.2. Media Literacy
4.1.2.1. PURPOSE
4.1.2.1.1. Open youths eyes to their surroundings from a questioning perspective rather than passively living, unaware, without making informed choices using media as the tool of that empowerment and agent of advocacy.
4.1.2.2. RESULT
4.1.2.2.1. Enhances transferable skills. Media tools are a means of raising the levels of other areas of the participants' development (often by stealth)
4.1.2.3. ISSUE
4.1.2.3.1. Rapid advancements in media technology have seen traditional literacy and media literacy so ENTWINED that they are inseparable. (Bazalgette, 2005)
4.1.2.3.2. Media Literacy Educational Revolution is happening at a snail's pace.
4.2. MAIN POINT: "Media democracy" and "Access/educational activities" have different motivations and aims even though their meanings are often combined as one term in Community Media.
4.3. Gives Broadcast/ Transmission Access to Participant Groups via
4.3.1. Community Broadcasts
4.3.1.1. PURPOSE
4.3.1.1.1. Mimics traditional media but with a community's voice and participation
4.3.1.2. RESULT
4.3.1.2.1. INCLUSION. The advantage is that it gives under-served audiences a means of representation and a voice.
4.3.1.3. ISSUE
4.3.1.3.1. Funding
4.3.2. Media Democracy
4.3.2.1. Involves overt ideological use i.e. Political and/or Alternative
4.3.2.2. PURPOSE
4.3.2.2.1. A structure that has been established to consciously undermine traditional media, to redress the balance between the reporters and the reported.
4.3.2.3. RESULT
4.3.2.3.1. DEMOCRACY and ACCESS
4.3.2.4. ISSUE
4.3.2.4.1. Political agendas & motivation is not always clear, can be hidden to some.
5. Channel ZerO
5.1. Stages
5.1.1. Stage 1 Consists of
5.1.1.1. Step 1) Preproduction Idea Development
5.1.1.2. Step 2) Production Begins
5.1.1.3. Step 3) Work was screened
5.1.1.4. Step 4) Project Ends. Facilitators go onto next project w/ different funding
5.1.1.4.1. Work is duplicated and sent to participants, the master gathers dust on a shelf.
5.1.2. Stage 2 Consists of
5.1.2.1. Step 1) Audience participation
5.1.2.2. Step 2) Generate Ideas
5.1.2.3. Step 3) Preproduction Idea Development
5.1.2.4. Step 3) Work was screened with Audience participation
5.1.2.5. Step 4) Audience discussion at screening stimulates new ideas to effect change that needs supporting.
5.1.2.5.1. Can lead to more funding and for the cycle of stage 2 to continue
5.1.2.6. Recognizes participants' achievements (throughout and ongoing)
5.2. Important Difference: Stage 2 Considers AUDIENCE
5.2.1. Who are they and how can they help increase the impact?
5.2.2. Audience is anyone who can affect the change.
5.2.3. Screening may include a discussion session.
5.2.3.1. Discussion generates more ideas, which can eventually lead to more funding and the cycle of stage 2 continues.
5.2.4. Maintains participant engagement and bucks the trend of start/stop tendency of so many fragmented projects.
5.3. Benefits for Participants in Stage 2
5.3.1. Gain a deep level of ownership.
5.3.2. Connect with their personal histories, sense of identity and values.
5.3.3. Learn to think differently about sustainability.
5.3.4. More aware of the impact of transferable skills.