ultraviolet-techno-ecology:
ultraviolet-techno-ecology:
ultraviolet-techno-ecology:
I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how the appreciation of art in any form has been reframed as “Content Consumption” - a phrase which focuses on the transactional relationship rather than the experience the audience is given through observation of the art.
It is the difference between saying
“I’ve bought several books by This Author.” rather than…
“I’ve enjoyed reading several books by This Author.”
Another thought I had about this. I think that a big part of the reason “Content” has become the word of choice is because it specifically frames the subject in a way that is advantageous to corporations. Videos, music, games, and everything else on a computer is Information, and saying “Information Consumption” immediately reveals the absurdity behind the idea of intellectual property particularly in relation to the internet.
Consumption inherently implies that the product is somehow removed from market circulation as a result. This might be because the owner is not presumed to resell it - or it might be literal in the case of food and other perishables. However when you “consume” a video online, you have not meaningfully removed that video from circulation in any way. There was no singular “Video Unit” that will no longer be available.
It’s information - and information is shared not consumed. When I read a book the text does not vanish from the pages. When I copy a file the original is not stolen away. The phrasing here is obviously corporate - an attempt to enshrine corporate positions on intellectual property into the English language.
(via hater-of-terfs)