Sunday, May 31, 2009

Picture This

One of the most recognizable earmarks of the Web 2.0 revolution is the endless opportunities for and inclination towards UGC (user generated content). While we have discussed the endless benefits of this type of approach to executing and managing information in the digital world, we have yet to touch upon what helps drive the success of such an approach; the fact that individuals all have the deep seeded desire to express themselves. However, in a world where information-share reigns supreme, and the self-expressions of others are only a keyword search away, artists run the risk of losing control over exactly how and how and where their work is used. Recent advancements in online photo-sharing provide a good example of this phenomenon. We have discussed how websites such as Flickr allow users to browse through photos to find specific images using only a key word search. Sites such as the impending Fotopedia are taking this idea to next level by allowing users to turn their photos into collaborative photo albums on specific topics:http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/31/fotonauts-offers-a-sneak-peak-at-its-upcoming-fotopedia/Such tools are useful not only for individuals wishing simply to contribute to an online visual database, but also for aspiring photographers to garner exposure for their work. However, a recent trend has started to emerge where advertising agencies are starting to bypass stock photography sites (e.g. www.gettyimages.com) in favor of more Flickr-esque resources when searching for images of specific subject matter. This behavior has resulted in photos being lifted off these sites and published without the photographers’ knowledge or consent. Moreover, because the business model of a site like Flickr does not focus on monetizing the distribution of the photos being displayed (compared to a stock photography website where that is the number one objective) resources are not devoted to monitoring for and preventing this type of behavior. Click the link below for a specific story regarding this phenonena:http://thomashawk.com/2006/09/did-major-advertising-agency-ddb.htmlNow, there is an argument to be made that this type of episode is simply the risk that must be assumed on the artists behalf in return for the increase exposure generated by posting work on a Flickr or Fotopedia. You be the judge.

No comments: