{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"171eb612-d523-4536-900d-5453dce83960","title":"Cultural Crowdfunding Platform Capitalism, Labour And Globalization","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":null,"requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"171eb612-d523-4536-900d-5453dce83960","id":"171eb612-d523-4536-900d-5453dce83960","uuid":"171eb612-d523-4536-900d-5453dce83960","title":"Cultural Crowdfunding Platform Capitalism, Labour And Globalization","normalized_title":"culturalcrowdfundingplatformcapitalismlabourandglobalization","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":null,"isbns":[],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":128,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/171eb612-d523-4536-900d-5453dce83960","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/Cultural%20Crowdfunding%20Platform%20Capitalism%2C%20Labour%20And%20Globalization","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/171eb612-d523-4536-900d-5453dce83960/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/171eb612-d523-4536-900d-5453dce83960/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/171eb612-d523-4536-900d-5453dce83960","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/171eb612-d523-4536-900d-5453dce83960/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/171eb612-d523-4536-900d-5453dce83960/search"},"page":{"printed_page":36,"pdf_page":44,"physical_index":44,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"4071965185d5f221b53c550a1041a2a20f9636252bb46682b042b9a28b8ffcd0"},"chapter":"Cultural Crowdfunding: Platform Capitalism, Labour and Globalization","content":"apparatuses (Agamben, 2007) in the economic and social realm as well as on a political and legal level. In this regard, they contribute to the implementation of what Philippe Corcuf (1998) calls ‘action regimes’ of a predominantly normative (rather than alternative) type. Unlike the experimental, DIY-inspired fundraising modalities of early Internet sites, mainly in the field of music, the platforms which have arisen since 2010 are inherently conceived as new intermediary players within the fragmented cultural economy.\n\nIn the first section we will discuss the polysemic nature of the concept of the ‘alternative’ in order to expose the ambiguities of its usage regarding the case of crowdfunding platforms. Subsequently, we will expose how the diferent apparatuses tend to transform these platforms into central players typically following a logic of intermediation (Miège 2017). Lastly, we will question the notion of an ‘alternative’ from the viewpoint of project carriers. Although they may be experienced as alternative by project creators, in reality they are better understood as new intermediaries firmly integrated within the prevalent capitalistic logics of the cultural and creative industries.\n\nDefining the Alternative\n\nThe notion of alternative is commonly attached to forms and systems which seek to exist and define themselves at the margins or in opposition to the existing, dominant models. From a strictly etymological point of view, the term has two key meanings. Firstly, it refers to ‘that which acts in turn’ (as in alternative electrical current); secondly, as of the sixteenth century, to ‘that which replaces’. It is clearly the second meaning that qualifies numerous practices or systems, but this usage is complex given that it pertains to such a variety of contexts and situations. As we are reminded by John Downing’s analysis on radical media, ‘everything, at some point, is alternative to something else’ (Downing 2001: p. ix). Nonetheless, what characterises them beyond this diversity is the specific goals which they exist for: either these practices aim to critique, transform and abolish the system within which they appear, or they seek to accompany the system’s structural mutations in order to maintain its hegemony (in the Gramscian sense).\n\nMuch existing literature in the field of alternative media has shown how, in the first case, these forms aim at emancipation and wider participation, various degrees of radical transformation. According to Marisol Sandoval and Christian Fuchs (2010) these alternative, militant forms are articulated around two divergent conceptions, which they name subjective or objective, in reference to a formulation put forward by Anthony Giddens. The first defines the alternative according to the actions carried out and the location of these last. The central point is that participation generated allows expression for individuals and groups that are deprived of it in traditional media. Horizontal and collective modes of control and organisation complete this, with DIY-inspired processes leading to more democratic forms of ‘management’. The second, objective, conception refers to work more concerned with contents, and with radical and critical media forms as such, envisaging these as a counter-force against existing institutions. It’s this dimension that is at play in artistic and cultural forms in the fields of music (Kruse 1993), film (Newman 2009) or literature, in the sense that they strive to transcend or abolish existing codes and norms, as well as mainstream economic or political logics, despite simultaneously running the risk of being reintegrated into a capitalist system that feeds on such alternatives. The case of the punk movement, as analysed by Dick Hebdige (1979), is a classic illustration of this phenomenon. And as Christian Fuchs (2010) also observes, despite their emancipatory goals, alternative media practices and contents must also avoid three major pitfalls: the fragmentation of the public sphere; their profitability and links with repressive political purposes; their tendency towards exclusivity.\n\n36\n\nCultural Crowdfunding: Platform Capitalism, Labour and Globalization","previous_page":null,"next_page":37}