From Cultural Industries to Entertainment and Creative Industries

RESEARCH

Received: 29-06-10 / Revised: 01-11-10 Accepted: 12-11-10 / Published: 01-03-11 View metadata, lcitation Raúl and Rodríguez similar papers Ferrándiz at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE Alicante (Spain) DOI:10.3916/C36-2011-03-06 provided by E-LIS From Cultural Industries to Entertainment and Creative Industries. The Boundaries of the Cultural Field De industrias culturales a industrias del ocio y creativas: los límites del «campo» cultural ABSTRACT This article analyzes the current trend towards dilution of the concept of «cultural industries» and the increasing usage of terms such as «entertainment industries», «leisure industries» or even «creative industries». We review recent specialized literature, identify overlapping between the above terms and conclude that this change is a new turning point in the concept of culture, closely associated with new spaces and times for its enjoyment, with the technological evolution of cultural products, changes in the ownership of their suppliers as well as with the shifting roles of author, actor and spectator. To understand this change, we identify and explain three factors: 1) from the strong, closed materiality and textuality of the classic cultural product to the malleability and convertibility permitted by new technologies; 2) from an essentially contemplative, reverent cultural experience to participant experimentation and play; 3) from a desire for permanence and intensity to constitutive contingency and super ficiality. We conclude by suggesting wider implications that go beyond the scope of this work: the melting pot that blurs the boundaries between culture and entertainment, which undermines the autonomy of the disputed cultural «field» situated between work and leisure (more pleasant than the first, more demanding than the second), and which also erases the boundaries between cultural entertainment and work (a merged environment of «otium and negotium», «homo ludens» and «homo laborans»). RESUMEN El artículo analiza la tendencia actual a la dilución del concepto de «industrias culturales» en fórmulas como «industrias del ocio», «del entretenimiento» o incluso «industrias creativas». Revisamos la bibliografía reciente especializada, acotamos el alcance y los solapamientos entre los términos mencionados y argumentamos que rubrican la deriva del concepto de «cultura», íntimamente asociada a nuevos espacios y tiempos de su disfrute, a mutaciones tecnológicas de los productos culturales, a cambios en la titularidad de sus proveedores, así como de los roles de autor, actor y espectador. Para entender esta mutación recurrimos a tres factores: 1) de la materialidad y textualidad fuertes, cerradas, exentas, del producto cultural clásico a la maleabilidad y convertibilidad que permiten las nuevas tecnologías, 2) de una experiencia cultural esencialmente contemplativa y reverente a una experi- mentación participante, en constante circulación, mancomunada y lúdica; 3) de una aspiración a la permanencia y la hondura, a una constitutiva con tingencia y superficialidad. Finalmente apuntamos implicaciones más ambiciosas, que desbordan el alcance del trabajo: ese totum revolutum que desdibuja las fronteras entre cultivarse y entretenerse, que socava la autonomía de ese disputado tercero en discordia –llamado «cultura»– entre el trabajo y el ocio (más placentero que el primero y más trascendente y esforzado que el segundo), también alcanza a borrar los límites entre ese ocio cultural y el propio trabajo (el neg-ocio, en definitiva). KEYWORDS / PALABRAS CLAVE Cultural industries, leisure industries, entertainment industries, creative industries, postproduction, cultural field. Industrias culturales, industrias del ocio, industrias del entretenimiento, industrias creativas, postproducción.

v Ph.D. Raúl Rodríguez Ferrándiz is Full Professor at the Departament of Communication and Social Psychology, University of Alicante (Spain) ([email protected]).

Comunicar, nº 36, v. XVIII, 2011, Scientific Journal of Media Litreracy; ISSN: 1134-3478; pages 149-156 www.revistacomunicar.com 150

1.Culture and leisure in retrospective Arts (plastic, literary, stage, musical, plus film and Less than half a century ago, there was a clear television fiction) and exclude mass communication difference between Mass Culture (or Cultural and the news media (Caves, 2000), whereas in other Industries)1 and Mass Entertainment or Leisure. Proof uses their embrace is wider as they include all the of this lies in two anthologies which came out within a classic sectors plus advertising, industrial design, year of each other from the same publisher, both fashion and interactive software (Jeffcutt & Pratt, containing work by highly prestigious contributors (Ro - 2002; Blythe, 2001)4. In the drift away from traditional

Comunicar, 36, XVIII, 2011 senberg & White, 1957; Larrabee & Meyersohn, cultural industries, as the subject of studies on 1958). In «Mass Culture», interests listed were popular economic and political culture (Huet, 1978; Flichy, literature, comics, cinema, radio and television, popular 1980; Miège, 1986; Zallo, 1988, 1992; Bustamante & music and advertising. In «Mass Leisure», interests Zallo, 1988), to the all-inclusive «leisure» or «enter- were attributed to the person at play or recreation, not tainment» or «creative» industries, we find a number to the consumer of cultural and media industries, of interrelated features which are common to the although all these activities might be pursued in one’s evolution witnessed in other industrial sectors. spare time. Pursuits analysed were sport, hobbies, vacations and activities such as membership of an 2. Digital leisure and culture: convergence, hyper- association or social life away from the home productability and transfiguration (restaurants, social gatherings, bars, pubs and dance The material nature of cultural «texts» (whether halls). We could say that the editors made an implicit written, visual, audiovisual, musical, etc.), is exactly distinction between services or products (books, what allows their conversion into economic «goods», records, films, TV programs) created by others, which as the sequence of their transmission presents them as required a mere contemplative attitude (as readers, what we might call «acquirable objects»: books, listeners or spectators), and leisure time... for records or videos (publications) but also television essentially active pursuits where participation in the (flow culture) increasingly marketed in the shape of spatial sense requires that we actively join in. catalogue products («video on demand» for example), The authors of the collected texts in both or where the stream itself is on sale (pay per view). publications were authorities in their field.. In «Mass We might remind ourselves at this point that one of Culture», contributors included Ortega, Greenberg, the most solid features of the concept of the Cultural Kracauer, Adorno, MacDonald, Löwenthal, Riesman, Industry was not the mere commercialisation of McLuhan and Lazarsfeld, among others. «Mass culture, but also its industrialisation, which allowed for Leisure» compiled texts by Huizinga, Mead, Piaget, reproduction of its media format, using specific Russell, Lafargue, Riesman (again), Lynes and Katz. equipment (Benjamin, 1973; Lacroix & Tremblay, By the turn of the century, these limits became less 1997: 68; Hesmondhalgh, 2007: 55-58; Lash & Lury well-defined and cultural industries were attracted to 2007: 1-15). and absorbed by proximity to other industries that Nevertheless, what we are witnessing now is the began to colonise people’s spare time. «hyper-reproducibility» of cultural products The «Enter tainment Industry» (Vogel, 2004; transformed into a numerical matrix which, on the one Caves, 2006) or the concept of «Leisure Industries» hand stimulates demand –by ensuring availability and (Roberts, 2004), or even crossovers such as «culture enabling that insatiable appetite for new products, and leisure industries» (García Gracia & al.; 2000, which is the defining feature of telematic cultural 2001, 2003) are categories that mix stage productions, consumption– and on the other, promotes the free popular literature, cinema, radio, television and access to the product itself, due to cooperative videogames together with participative sports, betting, exchanges (creative commons licences and «copy- gambling and casinos, theme parks and tourism, adult lefts», p2p exchange protocols for mp3 and mp4 files toys and games and even shopping, dining out and the and the circulation of free software), as well as consumption of alcoholic drinks. (Vogel2, 2004: 355- through social networking (Facebook, MySpace, 530; Roberts3, 2004: 61-198). As far as the label Twitter), which stimulate exchange and specialised «Creative Indus tries» is concerned, and its apparent websites for music (Spotify, Goear, Lastfm, desire to prevail (Caves, 2000; Blythe, 2001; Negus, Grooveshark), photography (Flickr), vídeo (YouTube, 2006; Deuze, 2009), the limits are less clear: in some BlipTV) and film (Pelicu las yonkis, Cinetube). instances these are restrictive rather than classic Yet we are lacking in certain aspects. Prior to the «cultural industries», since they identify more with the revolution in new technologies, many authors spoke of

cultural goods as «immaterial» goods (Hirsch, 1972: the space where it is being reproduced, that is to say, 639, 641-2; Lacroix & Tremblay, 1997: 11-19), such strictly material conditions. To say that cultural that one may be able to identify the fulfilment of this products –even in the digital age– are «immaterial» is «dematerialising» destiny within the process we to confuse cause with effect. The cause is always describe here. Nonetheless, «immaterial» is misleading material and its effect is always embodied in the since, in reality, its use aimed to contrast what we interaction between this materiality (visual, audio, might call the prosaic, immediate and universal audiovisual, in any case, physical) and a mind which,

monosemous utility of «material goods» with that other through bodily senses, cognitive patterns and prior Comunicar, 36, XVIII, 2011 aesthetic misdemeanour of cultural goods, namely the experience, interprets and enjoys. more ethereal, drawn out and subjective. Beware!. Notwithstanding, what we have been witnessing Cultural products are of an unquestionably material for a number of years now is not so much the nature (Miller, 1987, 2005; Storey, 1999; Lévy, 2007: dematerialisation of the cultural good, but perhaps a 40-1). This may sometimes take the form of a tangible «transfiguration» or «transubstantiation», so radical as quality, which they possess and can move from one to make it difficult for us to understand the «material» place to another, and which have texture, colour and nature of these new figures or substances. It is not so shape, to wit, a design (a bound book, with its pages printed using a certain font type with a picture on the front and However, it is true that we are witnessing not only the back covers, its jacket and marker ribbon, or the packaging confusion between leisure which lifts and ennobles and that for a phonographic or video recording, with a special design which dissipates and brutalises (to exaggerate the extreme for the album or movie cover poles), but an overlapping and even coincidence in time and and, of course, the design itself, its graphic image, the usability space for leisure and work, the industrialisation, of the menu which allows one to access audiovisual content, rationalisation and commercialisation of leisure and a soft, but also the design of the malleable, informal view of work. computer –or TV set– itself due to its ergonomic design). Or it may, without the need to take the shape of a physical object, continue to occupy space and time in what much that the product vanishes into thin air, but rather may be described in physical terms (a film screening, it becomes voluble, malleable, «liquid», as Bauman listening to an audio recording, even from a computer might say, assumes it convertibility due to some type of screen, by means of its speakers). We refer to two digital «equivalence». One thing seems clear at any series of phenomena which needed to be rate: our wonder at being able to fit entire libraries, differentiated: it is true that cultural experience does news or sound archives in a computer or even a USB not end in pure materiality, but that it should transcend memory stick (shall we say, downloaded, off-line), or it, thus signifying the need to read the book, listen to even more so, that they are accessible and linked to the record or see the film in order to get to their very one another in the vast territory which is Internet (let’s core, and those experiences are infinite and thus say, online, in that common ground called «the repeatable. Never theless, we cannot overlook nor cloud»), must be about as exciting as the feelings of the relegate the material dimension, a necessary condition early Twentieth Century music lover when listening to which may go beyond the genuine aesthetic the gramophone or the radio, or those of the first experience but which might determine the same. Our television viewers midway through the same century. attention does not just penetrate the fonts of a printed In any case, having made these points, the book –or the screen of an e-book– we are reading to conversion of what we might term a classic cultural get the sense and the plot constructed within its pages; product (the book, record, film or videotape) into a nor is listening immune to the balance of treble and digital file or accessible online document and its bass, the positioning of the speakers or the acoustics of assimilation into a setting such as a computer, where

© ISSN: 1134-3478 • e-ISSN: 1988-3293• Pages 149-156 152 Comunicar, 36, XVIII, 2011 entertainment opportunities. entertainment of range a from culture of assimilation the encourages rooms) chat lotteries, and betting sports gambling, and puzzles word videogames, as (such forms leisure other into merges and converges works these watching or listening reading, where computer, a as such setting a into assimilation its and document online accessible or file digital a into videotape) on film record, book, the product cultural classic a term might we what of conversion The potnte, s el s feig bouey indis absolutely offering as well as the opportunities, encourages entertainment of range a rooms) from culture of chat assimilation as sports lotteries, (such gambling, and forms and betting puzzles leisure word other videogames, into merges and converges works these watching or listening reading, longer what sets its value, rather its total availability for no are author its to afforded reverence the and time later a at enjoyment for activities withdrawal its a good, cultural of time ownership leisure exclusive The other immediate. becomes to proximity its when something which stimulates and moves him, and that is finds receptor the as soon as fulfilled is which action, as seen be to starts and touched, never but admired and protected away, stored treasured, is which work closed distant, as perceived be to ceases culture say, to is That digest. to easier much be to looks confused, betting, or parks as where theme the roles of author, actor and spectator become phenomena tourism, games, towards as drift diverse the there, from And participation. coproductive in result to liable is which «experience», as character their on placed is emphasis contrast, by and, recede «shut», «cold», extent certain «performative» to informed from and «experimentation» to experience from participation, to contemplation From 3. intermediaries. specialised or special and rituals places, time, of moments of independent criminate, ubiquitous, portable, desecrated enjoyment, h txult ad aeilt o clue t a to culture, of materiality and textuality The - or trailers where the soundtrack, titles or sequencing or titles soundtrack, the where trailers or hit songs, false trailers –for movies which do not exist of performances play-back choreographed mass their with «lipdubs» mixes, style DJ («mashups», montages musical or audiovisual of creation the in result which initiatives web-based of proliferation others). a suggest also is or There all them test indeed, to (or able choose are we which from plot the of prosecutions diverse offered are we where audiovisual– or literary is. product the provisional his behaviour, the more open, unfinished, random and reveal forward must and perform alias) an step using be may must to this (although operator also the it: but with information operations receive to not senses, only his use to required is who receptor a of intervention the is then greater the speed, frightening at cables optic fibre down hurtle which nature– their the at else, all above stands which goods cultural of transubstantiation– the rather, or convertibility, –the and 2007). reproduction Canclini, (García distribution unlimited globalised cooperative, mere of possibility the to due parody, and transformation ironic criticism, review, intervention, participative of possibility the which to texts subject always are which and proliferate unfinished fluctuate, constitutively but property author, private longer no occupying an unalterable space are and time as set other by their goods the On these place. any hand, in and time any at access This also applies to interactive narration –whether That is to say, it is not only a matter of immateriality © ISSN: 1134-3478 • e-ISSN: 1988-3293• Pages 149-156 Pages 1988-3293• e-ISSN: • 1134-3478 ISSN: fragmented into bits –whatever bits into fragmented product, cultural the of nature intangible the greater appropriate the not: perhaps an or Paradoxes, answer. the and awaiting sharing feeling, knowledge, and towards of know-how transmission to a error, «game» if you like, which points and trial practice, intervention, implies which and static– essentially and ecstatic mere beyond contemplation –almost mystical, goes experience which an to refers holding. This or by touching say, creative might one rimenting encouraging expe rather of creativity, democratic but – consummation «expe true of rience», of moment precise – - - Internet works: that hypertextuality which undermines which hypertextuality that works: Internet Porta, Fernández 112-118; 2008). 2007, 2008: vice (Baricco, in and paper… versa Science», local the «Popular of pages in the in History, news, daily the comics, advertising, music, television, film, in found is it itself: greater literature of and scope the within found not interpretation is beyond enjoyment whose go and which experience literature of portions other to connect they because extent great a to popular are least, at books successful book, a Today movies. other other books or paintings in other paintings or movies in in meaning their found which books species: same the the case, layers any many In inner meaning might be traceable to other examples of within. under nevertheless within, but fulfilment perhaps, find to on self-sufficient be, to them move to help outside no required had which entities and could, score musical and thus ending our voyage. Before, a book, a film and sinking of risk the to due peril, our at linger we which crests of waves as they emerge intermittently and upon for treasure,oncelocated,butsurfingskilfullyoverthe next the to interconnected node. It is not so on much a case of diving it propel another, to needed to impetus the to gain place necessary is than one longer any from for stopping without jumps which path a follows it rather but thing, the inside right get to an effort in vigour any with point single a on not attention «intimate». focus to always seems however, almost today, experience Cultural and «intense» thus and object was an to exclusively applied it that meaning cultural like, Before, you if activity, «circumscribed» a was experience experimentation. / experience the understand we which in way the modified greatly has music– cinema, painting, –literature, goods cultural of lsl rltd o h «ape» Burad 2005; (Bourriaud, «sampler» 2008) 2007, Porta, Fernández the so to production related (post) closely vast this reflect works creation– whose musical and film those plastic, literary, wit, to linked –to practices artistic still-institutionalised not next is to applies also but user, web everyday the This to confined very strangers. complete the by or modified us by be second, of can moment which the but at access, stability precarious own their to due precisely exist which ongoing, always are which do not feed off a single product that as regards productivity, practices telematic networking, social or «blogs» «wiki», as such phenomena overlooking Not 2009). (Yúdice, 2007; Díaz Arias, 2009; Lipovetsky & Serroy, movies…) home file, well-known a of genre the parody © ISSN: 1134-3478 • e-ISSN: 1988-3293• Pages 149-156 Pages 1988-3293• e-ISSN: • 1134-3478 ISSN: Moreover, it may be claimed that the digitalization the that claimed be may it Moreover, All this, if we look carefully, is exactly the way the way the exactly is carefully, look we if this, All 5 . esr, n t irlvne n i is sal e say, we shall its, in and irrelevance its in leisure, to seems merge into the immediate pleasure from experience other forms of cultural from pleasure of immediate form this that then is It together. mixed before not its own, but the echo of all those which have gone is which foam leaves and retreats it as one, previous the erases and over breaks reaches, wave each as just upcoming, those with story one number current the replace which but ephemeral as just are which offers, seductive other of tide and unstoppable the inundation: to success instant the but exhaustion, to much so due not of opportunity, forgetting, instant fragility the the of by situation, threatened cultural always of input, characteristics consumable ephemeral, the before withers 1996), 1961, (Arendt, study and embodied in works which are the object of veneration centuries, of the down travels which and receptor moment its to the only and author not its to both granted life the also but contact, outlives which culture, consumer to conoisseur from contingence, to transcendence From 4. point. dense particularly transit a at rest to coming in not and in points, interconnected the in «between» precisely that glows, sparkles, it because fun become coha a the has itself culture wish, entertainment: and culture of bitation explains we This if distraction. say, a (or to diversion is That fast. disperse, and is superficial today’s profound, and erudite intimate, intense, circumscribed, was which by, gone times of 2006). (Battelle, points certain at attractive and dense especially also is but infinity to virtually extendable is which series a in knowledge of portions together link thus, and, converge documents most is web-based of the number greatest is the where that connected, it since And useful, most the seeking. be to supposedly supposed are we text the which quote) and link (which to refer which texts appears, but above all by the number and relevance of not the is seek we word the times list of sets number the using results ordered the what searches: is Google of connection hierarchy of experience same That logic. fuzzy case this in logic, of full are which which and connections attention for beyond, another to on go to us invites our grabs that one next the to sight from on vanishes move we as recovered) be always can it now (although which and us before text first the finishing even without another, to one from skip to us inviting subject, any on links other to us take (or contaminates or sews) each text with «links» which ial, h pritne r rncnec of transcendence or persistence the Finally, experience cultural the to opposed as up, sum To - 153 Comunicar, 36, XVIII, 2011 154

«frivolity» (Rodríguez Fe rrán diz, 2008). Now, that listened to or watched. By contrast, there is the superficiality –multidimensional or rather, multi- exaltation of the experience of doing something with tasking– of current cultural experience, which allows culture (streamed music or video, in full flow at the the web surfer to simultaneously read, for example, a moment of access, for example) and beyond that, fictional story on the Internet or an article on naturo- creative experiments (enlarging, glossing over, pathy, whilst listening to chill-out versions of the works modifying, embellishing, enriching, remixing internet of Chopin or Mozart and all the while keeping an eye content) and cohabitation (share, cast it back into the

Comunicar, 36, XVIII, 2011 on the latest TV ghost story or crime series without fray that is Internet, recommend or criticise it) is to having to resist the temptation to share what he is bestow culture with its rightful factual dimension, reading, listening to or seeing with his Face book where culture is not a hidden treasure, but the some- contacts, and digest, judge and perhaps even analyse, times bumpy journey, even if that pairs it with other cannot be dismissed at a stroke by claiming that it is experiences which are not cultural in the sense of nothing more than a shortcut to the effort required by being «cultivated» or of «excellence». Some may a genuine cultural experience. So, summarising, remind us, as Adorno does (Horkheimer & Adorno, analysing, expressing opinions, linking the story to 1994: 189; Adorno, 2009), that contact with culture other texts and even modifying it cannot be generates pleasure, of course, but it is a serious, discredited. That superficiality cannot be explained austere pleasure, in contrast to mere distraction or merely as the resource of the latter-day Barbarian who entertainment, which are its caricature. And others destroys the liturgies and rites of that experience at the will argue that the gravity required of culture begs the same time as the very same sacred content which had question: cultural mandarins of all ages have always been revealed. That experience is not merely an easy, presided over what the appropriate attitudes are, and convenient way out, but requires a different kind of have demanded effort, made difficulties and erected effort. What precedes undoubtedly obliges us to reset barriers for both the creator and the receptor, the limits of the cultural «field» (Bourdieu, 2008): its difficulties or barriers that served to classify and to agents (and patients), its autonomy or heteronomy exclude. with respect to other fields (far more difficult to Perhaps the error is not so much in having to distinguish today than was the case years ago), the choose between one set of responses or another, all of appropriation of cultural capital and its impact on a far which, while still opposed, represent different forms of wider creative economy, the production of culture and malaise with respect to what should be considered its successive post-production, the productive routines culture. The problem, perhaps, lies in the scope of the required in any sector and, especially, the educational question. It is not so much a question of accentuating routines which serve to train those productive sectors, the levelling effect which would seem to degrade our responsibility as modest but increasingly culture and exalt –within the action of making empowered producers, prescribers or consumers of comparisons– the mere distraction, or as a way of culture and leisure. spending one’s time, but to take on board the complete removal of the limits between leisure time and working 5. Balance and perspectives time. All this portrays an ambivalent, paradoxical When leisure is delimited, whether or not culture panorama. On the one hand, there are some who, is included here – it would seem to be necessary to quite reasonably, lament the fact that attending theatre regard it in contrast to business, which would be its or opera is to be compared, as regards ways of using very negation («otium» vs. «negotium»). However, it is one’s leisure, with visits to theme parks or casinos (or true that we are witnessing not only the confusion in its virtual forms: videogames or betting websites), or between leisure which lifts and ennobles and that that a record or book can be considered in the same which dissipates and brutalises (to exaggerate the light as dining out or adventure holidays (let’s say, extreme poles), but an overlapping and even gastronomic or recreational experiences). Others coincidence in time and space for leisure and work, would argue, and rightly so, that culture which the industrialisation, rationalisation and commer - requires the reverential pilgrimage to the theatre or cialisation of leisure and a soft, malleable, informal opera is tainted by snobbery, as a ritual which view of work (Virno, 2003), both ravaged by the same expresses differences, and that a book, record or film torrential outburst which mixes new technologies, as material objects become fetishes, to be revered, participative cohabitation, experi mentation: of «homo collected and exhibited without having been read, ludens» and «homo laborans».

Notes owes or leaves behind for posterity, encouraged by the immediacy, 1 This is not the place to discuss the terms «Mass Culture» and the cause of such confusion in Internet, at every moment of use, as «Cultural Industry», which do not fit exactly, nor the transition from regards the limits to the recognisable, the intelligible and also the «Cultural Industry» in the singular, to the more descriptive, as usable, in true Do-It-Your self style. opposed to qualitative «Cultural Industries» (Rodríguez Ferrándiz, 2009a, 2009b, 2010). There are very interesting discussions on this References topic in «Cuadernos de Información y Comunicación», 9 (2004) ADORNO, T.W. (2009). Tiempo libre, in Crítica de la cultura y and in «Re vista de Occidente», 290-1 (2005), both dedicated to sociedad, II. Madrid: Akal; 573-582. Mass Culture. There are also sectorial studies on cultural industries, ARENDT, H. (1961). Society and Culture, in ROSENBERG, B. & Comunicar, 36, XVIII, 2011 applied to both Spain (Bustamante, 2002), Latin America (Mastrini WHITE , D.M. (Eds.). Mass Culture, op.cit.; 43-52. & Becerra, 2006; Castro, 2008) and the world in general ARENDT, H. (1996). La crisis en la cultura, su significado político y (Bustamante, 2003, 2004, 2007). social, in VARIOS (Eds.). Entre el pasado y el futuro. Barcelona: Pe- 2 Vogel’s book was originally titled «Entertainment Industry Eco - nínsula; 209-238. nomics» (2001), but has since been translated as «La industria de la BARICCO, A. (2008). Los bárbaros. Ensayo sobre la mutación. Bar- cultura y el ocio» (2004), a translation which is less confusing to the ce lona: Anagrama. Spanish speaking reader. The author dedicates each of the two long BATTELLE, J. (2006). Buscar. Cómo Google y sus rivales han re vo - chapters of his book to «Media and Entertainment» and «Live lucionado los mercados y transformado nuestra cultura. Bar ce lo - Entertainment», respectively, which would seem to suggest a na: Urano. distinction between «textual» mediation, which keeps it distance and BENJAMIN, W. (1973). La obra de arte en la época de su repro duc- where the viewer is limited to his or her condition as a tibilidad técnica, in Discursos interrumpidos, I. Madrid: Taurus; 15- contemplator, and live enjoyment, which allows and requires 57. participation but which are both considered as «entertainment». In BLYTHE, M. (2001). The Work of Art in the Age of Digital Re pro - the first, he analyses film, television, music, radio, the Internet, the duction: The Significance of Creative Industries. International Jour- publishing industry and games and toys, and in the second, casinos, n a l of Art & Design Education, 20, 2; 144-150. betting firms, sports, theme and recreational parks and «performing BOURDIEU, P. (2008). El sentido práctico. Madrid: Siglo XXI. arts and culture». As can be seen, there are unexplained BOURRIAUD, N. (2005). Postproduction. Culture as Screenplay: contradictions in both lists. How Art Reprograms the World. New York: Lukas & Sternberg. 3 Roberts organizes his study into three large sections, Providers BUSTAMANTE, E. (Coord.) (2002). Comunicación y cultura en la (commercial leisure, voluntary activities and the public sector), era digital. Barcelona: Gedisa. Provisions and Policies. Among the leisure domains, he points out BUSTAMANTE, E. (Coord.) (2003). Hacia un nuevo sistema that the three most important, given the proportion of the population mundial de comunicación. Barcelona: Gedisa. involved, the time dedicated to them and the volume of business BUSTAMANTE, E. (2004). Cultural Industries in the Digital Age: some generated, are tourism, dining out and the «media». Some distance provisional conclusions. Media, Culture and Society, 26 (6); 803- behind come sports, games of chance and the arts. He suggests that 820. many sectors are interrelated and overlap, and enjoy synergies BUSTAMANTE, E. (Coord.) (2007). Cultura y comunicación para el which support them: tourism nearly always implies eating out and siglo XXI. Diagnóstico y políticas públicas. Santa Cruz de Tene ri - often also implies attendance at artistic shows or visits to museums, fe: Ideco. sports may be watched live or on the television, etc. BUSTAMANTE, E. (2009). De las industrias culturales al entret e ni- 4 The label «Creative Industries» already enjoys institutional miento. La creatividad, la innovación... Viejos y nuevos señuelos pa- recognition in Great Britain where, since 1998, it has been the ra la investigación de la cultura. Diálogos de la Comunicación, 78 responsibility of the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (www.dialogosfelafacs.net/revista/articulos-resul-ta-do.-php?- (Blythe, 2001: 145-146). This Department claims that «Creative ed=78&id=112) (10-11-2010). Industries» are «those activities which have their origin in individual BUSTAMANTE, E. & ZALLO, R. (1988). Las industrias culturales en creativity, skill and talent and which have a potential for wealth and Spain. Madrid: Akal. job creation through the generation and exploitation of intellectual CASTELLS, M. (2009). Comunicación y poder. Madrid: Alianza. property» and include «advertising, architecture, the art and antiques CASTRO, C. (2008) (Coord.). Industrias de contenidos en Lati noa- market, crafts, design, designer fashion, film, interactive leisure soft- mé rica. Razón y Palabra. Grupo de Trabajo eLAC2007. (www.- ware, music, the performing arts, publishing, software and television ra zony palabra. org.mx/libros/libros/ Gdt_ e LAC _ me ta_13.pdf) (12- and radio» (Jeffcutt & Pratt, 2002: 227). The label «creative 11-2010). st industries» has been gaining ground since the beginning of the 21 CAVES, R. (2000). Creative Industries. Contracts between Art and Century, in academic literature and, above all, in pu blications on Commerce. Cambridge: Harvard U.P. economic geography, the economics of culture and urban studies, CAVES, R. (2006). Organization of Arts and Entertainment Indus - especially in Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian countries. For well- tries, in GINSBURGH, V. & THROSBY, D. (Eds.). Handbook of Econo - argued criticism of the concept, see Garnham, 2005; Zallo, 2007; mics of Art and Culture, I. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 533-566. Bustamante, 2009. DEUZE, M. (2009). Media Industries, Work and Life. European 5 This mutation, often presented in optimistic, even enthusiastic Journal of Communication, 24; 467-480. terms, also has its shady side. The participating consumer DÍAZ ARIAS, R. (2009). El vídeo en el ciberespacio: usos y lenguaje, («prosumer» was the term coined by Toffler back in 1980, and Co municar, 33; 63-71. «mass auto-communication» is the term given to the process by FERNÁNDEZ PORTA, E. (2007). Afterpop. La literatura de la im- Castells (2009: 87-108) which, on the one hand, stimulates, plosión mediática. Córdoba: Berenice. involves, marks, creates and shares and on the other, may even tend FERNÁNDEZ PORTA, E. (2008). Homo Sampler. Tiempo y consumo to show off its own triviality, with no clear conscience of what it en la era del Afterpop. Barcelona: Anagrama.

FLICHY, P. (1980). Les industries de l’imaginaire. Grenoble: P.U. tes. Estructura y concentración de las industrias culturales en Amé - de Grenoble. rica Latina. Buenos Aires: Prometeo. GARCÍA CANCLINI, N. (2007). Lectores, espectadores e internautas. MIÈGE, B. (2000). Les industries du contenu face à l’ordre infor - Barcelona: Gedisa. mationnel. Grenoble: P.U. de Grenoble. GARCÍA CANCLINI, N. & MONETA, C. (Coords.) (1999). Las in dus- MIÉGE, B. (2006). La concentración de las industrias culturales y trias culturales en la integración latinoamericana. Buenos Aires: mediáticas (ICM) y los cambios en los contenidos. Cuadernos de Eudeba. Información y Comunicación, 11; 155-166. GARCÍA GRACIA, M.I.; FERNÁNDEZ FERNÁNDEZ, Y. & ZOFÍO PRIETO, MIÈGE, B. & AL. (1986). L’Industrialisation de l’audiovisuel. Paris: J.L. (2000). La industria de la cultura y el ocio en Spain y su Aubier. Comunicar, 36, XVIII, 2011 aportación al PIB. Madrid: SGAE y Fundación Autor. MILLER, D. (1987). Material Culture and Mass Consumption. Ox - GARCÍA GRACIA, M.I., FERNÁNDEZ FERNÁNDEZ, Y. & ZOFÍO PRIETO, ford: Blackwell. J.L. (2001). La evolución de la industria de la cultura y el ocio en MILLER, D. (Ed.) (2005). Materiality. Durham. NC, London: Duke Spain por Comunidades Autónomas. Madrid: Fundación Autor. University Press. GARCÍA GRACIA, M.I. & ZOFÍO, J.L. (2003). La dimensión sectorial NEGUS, K. (2006). Rethinking creative production away from de la industria de la cultura y el ocio en Spain (1993-97). Madrid: cultural industries, in CURRAN, J. & MORLEY, D. (Eds.). Media and Fundación Autor. Cul tural Theory. London: Routledge. GARNHAM, N. (2005). From cultural to creative industries: an RODRÍGUEZ FERRÁNDIZ, R. (2008). Consumo, uso y disfrute cultural. analysis of the implications of the «creative industries» approach to Claves de Razón Práctica, 188; 78-82. arts and media policy making in the United Kingdom. International RODRÍGUEZ FERRÁNDIZ, R. (2009a). Los orígenes teórico-críticos del Jour nal of Culture Policy 11 (1); 15-30. concepto ‘industria cultural’, in Tortosa, V. (Ed.). Mercado y consu - HESMONDHALGH, D. (2007). The Cultural Industries. London: Sage. mo de ideas. De industria a negocio cultural. Madrid: Biblioteca HIRSCH, P.M. (1972). Processing Fads and Fashions: An Orga ni - Nueva; 56-72. zation-Set Analysis of Cultural Industries System. American Journal RODRÍGUEZ FERRÁNDIZ, R. (2009b). Tiempos de cambio: industrias of Sociology, 77 (4); 639-659. culturales en clave postindustrial. Telos, 78; 136-148. HORKHEIMER, M. & ADORNO, T.W. (1994). Dialéctica de la Ilus - RODRÍGUEZ FERRÁNDIZ, R. (2010). La musa venal. Producción y tración. Fragmentos filosóficos. Madrid: Trotta. con sumo de la cultura industrial. Murcia: Tres Fronteras. HUET, A. & AL. (1978). Capitalisme et industries culturelles. Gre - ROBERTS, K. (2004). The Leisure Industries. Basingstoke: Palgrave no ble: P.U. de Grenoble. Macmillan. JEFFCUTT, P. & PRATT, A.C. (2002). Managing Creativity in the ROSENBERG, B. & WHITE, D.M. (Eds.) (1957). Mass Culture. The Cul tural Industries. Creativity and Innovation Management, 11 (4); Popular Arts in America. Glencoe: The Free Press. 225-233. STOREY, J. (1999). Cultural Compsumption and Everyday Life. LACROIX, J.G. & TREMBLAY, G. (1997). The Information Society London: Arnold. and Cultural Industries Theory. Current Sociology 45 (4). VIRNO, P. (2003). Gramática de la multitud. Madrid: Traficantes LARRABEE, E. & MEYERSOHN, R. (Eds.) (1958). Mass Leisure. New de Sueños. York: The Free Press. VOGEL, H.L. (2004). La industria de la cultura y el ocio. Madrid: LASH, S. & LURY, C. (2007). Global Culture Industry: the Media- Fundación Autor. tion of Things. Cambridge: Polity Press. ZALLO, R. (1988). Economía de la comunicación y la cultura. Ma - LÉVY, P. (2007). Cibercultura. La cultura de la sociedad digital. drid: Akal. Bar celona: Anthropos. ZALLO, R. (1992). El mercado de la cultura. Estructura política y LIPOVETSKY, G. & SERROY, J. (2009). La pantalla global: cultura eco nómica de la comunicación. San Sebastián: Tercera Prensa. me diática y cine en la era hipermoderna. Barcelona: Anagrama. ZALLO, R. (2007). La economía de la cultura (y de la comunicación) MASTRINI, G. & BECERRA, M. (Dirs.) (2006). Periodistas y mag na - como objeto de estudio. Zer, 22; 215-234.