TOPP<sub>L</sub>ING TH<sub>E</sub> BASTION OF PROF<sub>E</sub>SSIONA<sub>L</sub>ISM
The first story in Howe’s article is told from the point of view of a consumer, Claudia Menashe, who was looking to buy photographs for an exhibition she organized. She contacted Mark Harmel, a professional photographer who offered what is known in the industry as “stock photos” (i.e., existing images) for about \$150 each. Just before the deal was struck, Menashe stumbled upon iStockphoto.com, a stock photo Web site where she could find images for about \$1 each. How, the reporter asks, could this site “undercut Harmel by more than 99 percent? . . . By creating a marketplace for the work of amateur photographers, homemakers, students, engineers, [and] dancers” (Howe 2006). Notwithstanding the harsh consequences for Harmel, the professional photographer, this is an upbeat story about the democratizing nature of network production, where everyone can “make it,” since thanks to network technology, the bar for entering into the marketplace has been lowered like never before, and now “hobbyists, part-timers, and dabblers suddenly have a market for their efforts” (Howe 2006). This has completely transformed the business of photography: “Professional-grade cameras now cost less than \$1,000. With a computer and a copy of Photoshop, even entry-level enthusiasts can create photographs rivaling those of professionals like Harmel. Add the Internet and powerful search technology, and sharing these images with the world becomes simple” (Howe 2006).
And so, “the product Harmel offers is no longer scarce.” Network technology, according to the digital discourse, topples the bastion of what is by definition an exclusionary category: professionalism. It undercuts its guildlike privileges and instead empowers “the people” in two ways: hardware and software become cheap enough for nonprofessionals to acquire and a connection to the Internet renders virtually anyone a viable participant in the marketplace. “Technological advances in everything from product design software to digital video cameras are breaking down the cost barriers that once separated amateurs from professional” (Howe 2006); technology democratizes and popularizes economic opportunities. The boundaries between professionals and “enthusiasts” are blurred, since both have equal access to both the equipment and the social network needed to make and sell their products. Professionals and hobbyists are, of course, different in one crucial way: since the latter do not consider this activity their primary source of livelihood, they are ready to give away their products for free or very cheaply. These new circumstances create a market heaven: consumers are able to buy more cheaply, and amateurs are able to enter into the loop of production and creativity and offer the fruits of their passion. The only “loser” in this particular story about crowdsourcing seems to be Harmel, for whom photography is a profession and a career.
120
Media and New Capitalism in the Digital Age