Copy of Lilli Elias Thesis Public
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Towards a More Cooperative Archive: Institutional Neglect and the Necessity for Community Empowerment within Independent Online Music Radio By Lilli Elias Master’s Thesis in Archiving and Information Studies, Department of Media Studies University of Amsterdam 31 January, 2020 Supervisor: Dr. M.J. Karabinos 2 THANK YOUS Academic advisors: To Michael Karabinos, Annet Dekker, Carolyn Birdsall and Corinna Kaiser, thank you for being so generous with your time and your input. Your patience and resources have been invaluable during this process. For conversations: To Laurent Fintoni, Tim Sweeney, Jason Scott, Todd Burns, Greg Markus, Leroy Chaar, Koen Nutters and Mint Park, thank you for your willingness to converse with me and share your knowledge. Thank you to all of the participants in the case studies, and to my family and friends for their support. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Thank Yous……………………………………………………………………………………………..... 2 Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………………….….. 3-4 Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………………………... 5 Chapter One: Introduction………………………………………………………………………….. 6-17 1.0 Aim……………………………………………………………………………………….... 6-9 1.1 Research Questions……………………………………………………………………….. 9 1.2 Purpose of the Study……………………………………………………………………... 10 1.3 Background and Context…………………………………………………………….. 10-14 1.4 Significance of the study…………………………………………………………………. 14 1.5 Scope of the Research……………………………………………………………….. 14-15 1.6 Definition of terms…………………………………………………………………….. 15-17 1.7 Organization of Thesis………………………………………………………………….... 17 Chapter Two: Literature Review………………………………………………………………….. 17-43 2.0 Subsections……………………………………………………………………………. 17-18 2.1 “Net Radio”.......................................................................................................... 18-20 2.2 Current Approaches to Archiving Radio Collections…………………………….... 20-23 2.3 Eliminating Third-party Platform Reliances………………………………………... 23-25 2.4 Networked Radio and Networks of Communities…………………………………. 25-27 2.4.1 Decentralized and Nonhierarchical Forms of Communities…………... 27-28 2.4.2 Crowdsourced, Fan-based and Amateur Digital Music Archiving……. 28-31 2.4.3 Online Music Forums………………………………………………………….. 32 2.5 Community Archiving: Domain and Best Practices……………………………….. 32-34 2.5.1 Post-Custodial Approach………………………………………………….. 34-35 2.5.2 Participatory Archives……………………………………………………... 35-36 2.5.2.1 Crowdsourcing Preservation…………………………………... 36-37 2.5.2.2 Microhistory Projects……………………………………………….. 37 2.5.2.3 Crowdsourcing Metadata…………………………………………... 37 2.5.2.4 Participatory Appraisal………………………………………….. 36-38 2.5.2.5 Open-source Solutions……………………………………………... 38 2.5.2.6 Proactive Archiving……………………………………………... 38-39 2.5.2.7 Communities as Record-Keeping Systems………………….. 39-40 2.6 Networks of Care……………………………………………………………………... 40-42 2.7 Interdependence…………………………………………………………………….... 42-43 Chapter 3.0: Methodology……………………………………………………………………….... 44-51 3.0 Subsections……………………………………………………………………………. 44-45 3.1 Interviews…………………………………………………………………………….... 45-47 3.1.1 Interview Research Methodology………………………………………... 45-46 3.1.2 Station Interview Methodology……………………………………………….. 46 3.1.3 Users Interview Methodology…………………………………………….. 46-47 3.1.4 Informational Interview Methodology………………………………………... 47 3.2 Case Study Research Methodology……………………………………………………. 48 3.3 Methodology for Assessment of Pros and Cons…………………………………... 48-49 3.4 Theoretical Methodology……………………………………………………………….... 49 4 3.4.1 “Networks of Care”................................................................................ 49-50 3.4.2 “Interdependence”................................................................................ 50-51 Chapter 4: Results................................................................................................................. 51-63 4.0 Subsections.............................................................................................................. 51 4.1 Defunct Stations.................................................................................................. 51-52 4.1.1 Berlin Community Radio........................................................................52-53 4.1.2 East Village Radio................................................................................. 53-54 4.1.3 Red Light Radio......................................................................................... 54 4.1.4 RBMA Radio.............................................................................................. 54 4.1.5 Results.................................................................................................. 54-55 4.2 Current Stations........................................................................................................ 55 4.2.1 The Lot Radio....................................................................................... 55-56 4.2.2 Dublab.................................................................................................. 56-57 4.2.3 Cashmere Radio................................................................................... 57-58 4.2.4 Noods Radio......................................................................................... 58-59 4.2.5 Intergalactic FM......................................................................................... 59 4.2.6 Results.................................................................................................. 59-61 4.2.7 Conclusion............................................................................................ 61-62 4.3 Users................................................................................................................... 62-63 4.4 Additional Interviews................................................................................................. 63 Chapter 5: Weighing Benefits and Drawbacks of Community Involvement in Archiving…... 64-71 5.0 Background......................................................................................................... 64-66 5.1 Benefits.................................................................................................... 66-67 5.2 Drawbacks............................................................................................... 67-71 5.3 Assessment.................................................................................................. 71 Chapter 6: Summary, Conclusions, Discussion and Recommendations…………………….. 71-78 6.1 Subsections.............................................................................................................. 72 6.2 Suggestions.............................................................................................................. 72 6.2.1 Demystifying the Archive.......................................................................72-73 6.2.2 Shifting Archival Attitudes and Culture………………………………………. 73 6.2.2.1 Stations…………………………………………………………... 73-74 6.2.2.2 Users........................................................................................... 74 6.2.3 Focus on Metadata............................................................................... 74-76 6.2.4 Peer-to-Peer File Sharing, Open Source and Wikis………………….... 76-77 6.3 Thoughts on the Future………………………………………………………………. 77-78 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………………….... 78-83 Appendix……………………………………………………………………………………………..84-95 A Interviews……………………………………………………………………………...….85-90 B List of Independent Online Music Radio Stations……………………………...……..91-95 5 ABSTRACT As radio stations migrate from the airwaves to online, a new crop of born-digital radio stations have emerged, creating a translocal network of independent music that has never existed before in this capacity. Independent online music radio stations represent a culturally significant yet overlooked site of cultural transmission and interplay. The global reach of the internet means that these stations are both hyper-local and dispersed, operating within an unprecedented realm of community radio. While stations focus on archiving and distributing each episode during the life of the station, few stations have contingency plans in case of station closure, and case studies of defunct independent online music radio stations reveal that stations rely heavily on third-party platforms for the safekeeping of their heritage. Despite the clear cultural value that independent online music radio stations have on their respective communities and the general music community at large, there are few resources or sustainable options for these stations to archive their output once they are no longer operating. Prompted by the question “whose responsibility should it be to manage the archive when its creators no longer can,” this thesis imagines the possibility of community members stepping in as custodians of independent online music radio heritage, both during the life of the station and after its potential demise. Applying the theories of “interdependence” and “networks of care” to independent online music radio station archives, and inspired by the recent work of participatory archives, I weigh the benefits and disadvantages of involving the community in the archiving and custodianship of independent online music radio station archives, relying on data from case studies I conducted with station representatives, users and specialists. 6 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1.0 Aim: As many sites of cultural production have migrated online, radio too has followed suit, demonstrating the renewed relevance of the medium.1