Lately, we have been doing lots of work, for others. For free.
Millions of users of sites like Facebook and MySpace are clicking away at their profiles, adding detailed information about themselves and others. “We” are uploading content to sites like Flickr, YouTube, the microblogging service Twitter and many others, and our labor creates vast databases about ourselves -what I previously described as a sort of mass exhibitionism.
Facebook’s profit model is built upon an ownership of its user’s labor, specifically, the intimate detail of our lives and self-presentations. This is an example a larger trend of “prosumption,” that is, the simultaneous role of being a producer of what one consumes. In the material world we are doing this more often by scanning and bagging our own groceries, checking ourselves onto planes and into hotels, etc.
The websites mentioned above are part of the user-generated and social turn the Internet has taken in the last few years –what has come to be known as Web 2.0. And prosumption generally, and especially on Web 2.0, is the mechanism by which we become unpaid workers (“crowd sourcing”), producing valuable information for the benefit of businesses. This is the almost endlessly efficient business model of Web 2.0 capitalism.
Karl Marx argued for taking control of the means of production, and on Web 2.0, to some degree, we have. But what remains in the hands of the few, the businesses, is the profit-potential. Facebook’s reach is ever-growing and the company is valued at $15 billion dollars as of 2007, precisely due to the data that users donate to the site.
Perhaps many do not mind giving away their labor because they enjoy the services provided, such as the richly social Facebook platform. However, we should also ask why the personal data of ourselves, that we are producing, does not belong to us? Given the successes of non-profit/open source software and applications (e.g., Linux, Firefox, etc), shouldn’t we be calling for a non-profit/open source social networking platform (i.e., an open source Facebook-like platform) where businesses do not own the highly personal data about ourselves and our socializing? What other ways can we think of that removes the link between our data (and labor) and corporate profit? ~nathan
Read More: Facebook Aims to Extend Its Reach Across the Web
Social Movements and New Media
21 responses so far ↓
okathleen // January 16, 2009 at 10:38 pm
It seems to me that the future popularity of Facebook et al will fade in step with the downturn in the global economy. The narcissistic, egomaniacal self cannot flaunt its self indulgent psyche as the house of cards collapses around it. Logging off is the new staying in.
http://www.okathleen.wordpress.com
drewstanley // January 21, 2009 at 12:41 pm
I think the business model of Facebook has yet to settle down. It may mature, or it may enter a decline stage. Facebook’s consumer-created database gives almost unlimited potential which businesses find impossible to ignore, and thus money is going into experimenting with ways to harness this potential for now. But if the mood changes, if the consensus grows that there isn’t much profit to be made, then perhaps the corporate factor and Facebook’s staggering valuation will fall away from the site. The NY Times ran an article on Proctor & Gamble’s experiences with Facebook here: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/14/business/media/14digi.html?ref=media
There’s also the issue of ad-blockers. I use them on Firefox and it’s cleared my Facebook experience and brought it back to the social-networking core. I don’t see why this aspect of Facebook should diminish with the economic downturn: people will still be organising events online, posting photos and playing games. Facebook is useful in many ways people have come to find almost essential.
There are many ways to go about using Facebook, even as a company. A distinction can be drawn between simply developing new ways of advertising products to purchase, as Proctor & Gamble did, and using the platform to create a new type of academic social network, which is voluntary and non-obtrusive, but which may tie in with corporate objectives.
For example, there is an event page for Blackwell Compass’s Interdisciplinary Virtual Conference in October as advertised on this blog:
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/event.php?sid=eddac05519167848f8b5a7eddf3ceeb2&eid=50572191153
kiyallsmith // January 21, 2009 at 11:21 pm
It seems that this case really challenges the meaning of the phrase “ownership of the means of production.” It also challenges some of these terms individually: ownership, means, production. Very interesting analysis of Marx and Web 2.0!
Keri
britannica is putting customers to work « nathanjurgenson // March 25, 2009 at 3:44 pm
[...] consumers, highlighting the highly efficient business model of turning consumers into unpaid “prosumers” (those that consume that which they produce). A further discussion might begin with asking [...]
britannica is putting customers to work « Sociology Lens // March 26, 2009 at 2:55 pm
[...] consumers, highlighting the highly efficient business model of turning consumers into unpaid “prosumers” (those that consume that which they produce). A further discussion might begin with asking [...]
facebook and the transumer as liquid capitalism « nathanjurgenson // June 10, 2009 at 1:58 pm
[...] consumers of Facebook (i.e., us) are also producing content and value for the site, we are “prosumers” (producers of that which we consume). Is it the case that “weightless [...]
facebook, the transumer and liquid capitalism « Sociology Lens // June 16, 2009 at 1:38 am
[...] consumers of Facebook (i.e., us) are also producing content and value for the site, we are “prosumers” (producers of that which we consume). Is it the case that “weightless [...]
weightless capitalism « nathanjurgenson // July 27, 2009 at 3:00 am
[...] is that much of the content production is out-sourced to the consumers. That is, we are the prosumers of Facebook because we are simultaneously the producers and consumers of it. The result is that we [...]
weightless capitalism « Sociology Lens // July 27, 2009 at 3:08 am
[...] is that much of the content production is out-sourced to the consumers. That is, we are the prosumers of Facebook because we are simultaneously the producers and consumers of it. The result is that we [...]
culture de-jamming « Sociology Lens // August 24, 2009 at 5:13 am
[...] Station in London. The latter example also explores how consumers are in part producers (that is, prosumers) of this culture de-jamming, making this jamming of the culture jammers even more insidious. Can [...]
the culture of efficiency « nathanjurgenson // September 6, 2009 at 4:11 pm
[...] sites or the changing relations of production and consumption online, leading to the rise of prosumption and the prosumer (briefly, prosumption involves both production and consumption rather than focusing on either one [...]
the culture of efficiency « Sociology Lens // September 6, 2009 at 4:12 pm
[...] sites or the changing relations of production and consumption online, leading to the rise of prosumption and the prosumer (briefly, prosumption involves both production and consumption rather than focusing on either one [...]
the prosumer and intimate profit « Sociology Lens // September 21, 2009 at 1:10 pm
[...] this blog has focused on the labor of the crowds. I have posted that the “prosumers of the world should unite” and have continued to write on the topic. Bmckernan expertly handled the topic when [...]
the prosumer and intimate profit « nathanjurgenson // September 21, 2009 at 1:10 pm
[...] this blog has focused on the labor of the crowds. I have posted that the “prosumers of the world should unite” and have continued to write on the topic. Bmckernan expertly handled the topic when [...]
Out of Print: Prosumption and the Triumph of New Media « Sociology Lens // September 21, 2009 at 6:25 pm
[...] with taste or educational development. Rather, it is, largely, economic. The concept of “prosumption” has already been addressed several times on this blog, but as a refresher: prosumption [...]
towards theorizing an augmented reality « nathanjurgenson // October 5, 2009 at 3:03 pm
[...] used, I have boiled it down to the recent explosion of user-generated content (thus the focus on prosumption). This past summer, O’Reilly has declared another new era, what he calls “Web Squared”: [...]
towards theorizing an augmented reality « Sociology Lens // October 5, 2009 at 3:09 pm
[...] used, I have boiled it down to the recent explosion of user-generated content (thus the focus on prosumption). This past summer, O’Reilly has declared another new era, what he calls “Web Squared”: [...]
When Prosumption is Law, the Prosumer is King (for Now) « Sociology Lens // October 18, 2009 at 1:04 am
[...] prosumer has been discussed widely on this blog (see, for, example: prosumers of the world unite, Light capitalism, prize economics, and the prosumer, Out of Print: Prosumption and the Triumph of [...]
When Prosumption is Law, the Prosumer is King (for Now) « PJ Rey: Posts from Sociology Lens // October 21, 2009 at 5:49 pm
[...] prosumer has been discussed widely on this blog (see, for, example: prosumers of the world unite, Light capitalism, prize economics, and the prosumer, Out of Print: Prosumption and the Triumph of [...]
facebook’s message of empowerment « nathanjurgenson // December 14, 2009 at 7:42 am
[...] we can describe this strategy as an outcome of the new more weightless prosumer capitalism. Prosumer because we simultaneously consume and produce nearly all of the content on Facebook. Weightless (as [...]
facebook’s message of empowerment « Sociology Lens // December 14, 2009 at 2:49 pm
[...] we can describe this strategy as an outcome of the new more weightless prosumer capitalism. Prosumer because we simultaneously consume and produce nearly all of the content on Facebook. Weightless (as [...]
You must be logged in to post a comment.