Skip to content
1981
Volume 18, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 1476-4504
  • E-ISSN: 2040-1388

Abstract

Connectivity made possible by the diffusion of digital technologies has offered new possibilities for the public to interact with media, including radio. However, interactions are often framed by globally managed platforms, owned by companies with values based on maximizing profit, rather than prioritising Illich’s forms of conviviality. In this article, we draw on experiences from the Grassroot Wavelengths project that introduces an innovative peer-to-peer platform to support the creation and management of community radio stations. We offer insight into the practices of participation in community media, where the users influence decisions concerning the technology, the content, the actors and the organization policy of the radio station, through a participatory design approach. These collaborations between researchers and users, together with a focus on the development of relational assets in local contexts, are fundamental in an attempt to design a platform that fosters conviviality and offers an alternative way to consider participation in community media.

Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program (Award 780890)
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/rjao_00015_1
2020-04-01
2024-06-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/rj/18/1/rjao.18.1.43.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1386/rjao_00015_1&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Ameripour, Aghil,, Nicholson, Brian, and Newman, Michael. ( 2010;), ‘ Conviviality of Internet social networks: An exploratory study of Internet campaigns in Iran. ’, Journal of Information Technology, 25:2, pp. 24457.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Avram, Gabriela,, Choi, Jaz Hee-jeong,, De Paoli, Stefano,, Light, Ann,, Lyle, Peter, and Teli, Maurizio. ( 2019;), ‘ Repositioning CoDesign in the age of platform capitalism: From sharing to caring. ’, CoDesign, 15:3, pp. 18591.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bonini, Tiziano. ( 2014;), ‘ The new role of radio and its public in the age of social network sites. ’, First Monday, 19:6, https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v19i6.4311. Accessed 15 February 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Carpentier, Nico. ( 2012;), ‘ The concept of participation. If they have access and interact, do they really participate?. ’, Fronteiras – Estudos Midiáticos, 14:2, pp. 16477.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Carpentier, Nico. ( 2015;), ‘ Differentiating between access, interaction and participation. Conjunctions. Transdisciplinary Journal of Cultural Participation, 2:2, pp. 728.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Cibin, Roberto,, Teli, Maurizio, and Robinson, Sarah. ( 2019;), ‘ Institutioning and community radio. A comparative perspective. ’, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Communities & Technologies – Transforming Communities (C&T ’19), Vienna, Austria, 3–7 June, New York:: Association for Computing Machinery (ACM);, pp. 14354, https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3328320.3328392. Accessed 22 June 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Correia, Rute,, Vieira, Jorge, and Aparicio, Manuela. ( 2019;), ‘ Community radio stations sustainability model: An open-source solution. ’, Radio Journal: International Studies in Broadcast & Audio Media, 17:1, pp. 2945.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Csikszentmihályi, Chris. ( 2012;), ‘ Engineering collectives: Technology from the coop. ’, Limn, 2, March, https://limn.it/articles/engineering-collectives-technology-from-the-coop/. Accessed 15 February 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Csíkszentmihályi, Chris, and Mukundane, Jude. ( 2015;), ‘ RTD2015 19 RootIO – Platform design for civic media. ’, Proceedings of the 2nd Biennial Research through Design Conference, Cambridge, UK, 25–27 March, https://figshare.com/articles/RTD2015_19_RootIO_-_Platform_Design_for_Civic_Media/1328001/1. Accessed 22 June 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Csíkszentmihályi, Chris, and Mukundane, Jude. ( 2016;), ‘ RootIO: ICT + telephony for grassroots radio. ’, 2016 IST-Africa Week Conference, Durban, 11–13 May, New York:: IEEE;, pp. 113.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Denzin, Norman K., and Lincoln, Yvonna S.. ( 2017), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, CA:: Sage;.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Ekbia, Hamid R., and Nardi, Bonnie A.. ( 2017), Heteromation, and Other Stories of Computing and Capitalism, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. European Commission ( 2018;), ‘ Grassroots Wavelengths: Highly networked grassroots community radio through a scalable digital platform. ’, 24 November 2017, https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/780890. Accessed 15 February 2020.
  14. Fuchs, Christian. ( 2012;), ‘ Dallas Smythe today – the audience commodity, the digital labour debate, Marxist political economy and critical theory. ’, tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique, 10:2, pp. 692740.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Illich, Ivan. ( 1973), Tools for Conviviality, London:: Calder and Boyars;.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Illich, Ivan. ( 1983;), ‘ Silence is a commons. ’, CoEvolution Quarterly, 40 (Winter), pp. 59.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Jarrett, Kylie. ( 2015), Feminism, Labour and Digital Media: The Digital Housewife, London:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Light, Ann, and Miskelly, Clodagh. ( 2019;), ‘ Platforms, scales and networks: Meshing a local sustainable sharing economy. ’, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 28:3&4, pp. 591626.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Ostrom, Elinor. ( 1990), Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action, Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Poderi, Giacomo. ( 2019;), ‘ Sustaining platforms as commons: Perspectives on participation, infrastructure, and governance. ’, CoDesign, 15:3, pp. 24355.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Scholz, Trebor. ( 2016), ‘Platform Cooperativism’ – Challenging the Corporate Sharing Economy, New York:: Rosa Luxemburg Foundation;.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Scholz, Trebor, and Schneider, Nathan. (eds) ( 2017), Ours to Hack and to Own: The Rise of Platform Cooperativism, A New Vision for the Future of Work and a Fairer Internet, New York and London:: OR Books;.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Schweik, Charles M.. ( 2014;), ‘ Toward the comparison of open source commons institutions. ’, in B. M. Frischmann,, M. J. Madison, and K. J. Strandburg. (eds), Governing Knowledge Commons, Oxford:: Oxford University Press;, pp. 25579.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Schweik, Charles M., and English, Robert C.. ( 2012), Internet Success: A Study of Open-Source Software Commons, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Sciannamblo, Mariacristina,, Cibin, Roberto,, Žišt, Petra,, Csíkszentmíhalyi, Chris, and Teli, Maurizio. ( 2019;), ‘ Co-designing collaborative care work through ethnography. ’, in P. Travlou, and L. Ciolfi. (eds), Ethnographies of Collaborative Economies Conference Proceedings, Edinburgh, University of Edinburgh, 25 October, http://sharingandcaring.eu/news/conference-proceedings-published. Accessed 8 June 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Scott, Kristen M.,, Ashby, Simone,, Braude, David A., and Aylett, Matthew A.. ( 2019;), ‘ Who owns your voice?: Ethically sourced voices for non-commercial TTS applications. ’, CUI ‘19: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces, Dublin, Ireland, 22–23 August, New York:: Association for Computing Machinery (ACM);, pp. 13, https://doi.org/10.1145/3342775.3342793. Accessed 8 June 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Simonsen, Jesper, and Robertson, Toni. ( 2012), Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design, London:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Sinton, Maureen. ( 2018;), ‘ No longer one-to-many: How web 2.0 interactivity is changing public service radio’s relationship with its audience. ’, Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 25:1, pp. 6276.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Söderberg, Johan. ( 2015), Hacking Capitalism: The Free and Open Source Software Movement, London:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Söderberg, Johan, and Delfanti, Alessandro. ( 2015;), ‘ Hacking hacked! The life cycles of digital innovation. ’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 40:5, pp. 79398.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Srnicek, Nick. ( 2017), Platform Capitalism, Cambridge:: Polity;.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Teli, Maurizio,, Di Fiore, Angela, and D’Andrea, Vincenzo. ( 2016;), ‘ Computing and the common: An empirical case of participatory design today. ’, PDC ’16 – Proceedings of the 14th Participatory Design Conference: Full Papers – Volume 1, Aarhus, Denmark, 15–19 August, New York:: Association for Computing Machinery (ACM);, pp. 110, https://doi.org/10.1145/2940299.2940312. Accessed 8 June 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Teli, Maurizio,, Lyle, Peter, and Sciannamblo, Mariacristina. ( 2018;), ‘ Institutioning the common: The case of commonfare. ’, PDC ’18 – Proceedings of the 15th Participatory Design Conference: Full Papers – Volume 1, Genk, Belgium, 20–24 August, New York:: Association for Computing Machinery (ACM);, pp. 111, https://doi.org/10.1145/3210586.3210590. Accessed 8 June 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Terranova, Tiziana. ( 2000;), ‘ Free labor: Producing culture for the digital economy. ’, Social Text, 18:2, pp. 3358.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Cibin, Roberto,, Robinson, Sarah,, Scott, Kristen M.,, Sousa, Duarte,, Žišt, Petra,, Maye, Laura,, Sciannamblo, Mariacristina,, Ashby, Simone,, Csíkszentmihályi, Christopher,, Pantidi, Nadia, and Teli, Maurizio. ( 2020;), ‘ Co-designing convivial tools to support participation in community radio. ’, Radio Journal: International Studies in Broadcast & Audio Media, 18:1, pp. 4361, doi: https://doi.org/10.1386/rjao_00015_1
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/rjao_00015_1
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error