Memes and Mashups
The meaning behind a meme is usually discernable through connection. Connection and association are the mechanisms behind meaning and creation. There is little evidence to support the traditional idea that an artist “creates” something raw from an “untouched, uninfluenced” part of him or herself. Instead, the more parsimonious version of creation is not so much a creation, but an assemblance of influences into a new form or function. From this modern definition, the meaning of memes can be eviscerated, and effectively used to analyze memes.
Those who have delved into the (not so) modern study of media and culture (Jenkins, Huh, and Kavoori) have all contributed to the beginning of an analytical movement to bring together modern culture and academia. Kavoori, with his trailblazing contribution of categories, leaves an area of study wide open to future researchers, and in fact often suggesting throughout his work areas of future research. Although his research managed to identify categorical references within the vast domain of YouTube, his work leaves room for revisions. For instance, his work requires categorical requirements; requirements presented in a quantified manner (as to reduce the reliance on subjectivity) to either exclude/include material from/into a category. While Kavoori does have lines drawn between categories, his work needs to be refined so that these lines become clearer, facilitating future research and revisions. As he stated several times throughout his work, YouTube is a complex series of connections between videos; lines between videos will often be arbitrary, with the purpose of studying certain aspects of the video (i.e., the self-reflective aspect, the experimental aspect, etc.). It is this movement away from the initial attempt to categorize entire videos that will elucidate the most research.
Kavoori is not the only modern researcher who has taken an interest in YouTube. While Jenkins states, “YouTube represents perhaps the most powerful distribution channel so far for amateur media content” (Jenkins, 2006), distributors of culture designed to target the amateur are increasingly boundless. YouTube may be the most known distributor in a broad category of distributors; from websites that host memes, to apps like 500px that allow amateur photographers to upload content, the amateur certainly has their choice of sites. Amidst this rising sea of amateur content, YouTube allows for the circulation of personal moments to viral commercials. And indeed,
The various media industries are struggling to figure out how to manage this service, which clearly yields them benefits in terms of increased audience awareness and interest in their content (Jenkins, 2006).
These media companies seem to want to use the services of YouTube and other distributors targeting amateur “prosumers” in the sense that they want to circulate their messages along these amateur channels. While this increases their visibility, and acts as "free marketing," this approach does present media companies with troublesome issues. These media companies seem increasingly opposed to the participatory elements that these distributors rely on. In essence, these media companies want to “manage” services like YouTube, while not contributing to the elements and principles YouTube is based on. Although YouTube has not resisted academic categorizing, it seems as though media companies are seeking rights within YouTube that go against the very nature of the service.
Taking advantage of YouTube as a source of viral marketing means letting go some of the control that the networks believe they have over what happens to their content: for some of the broadcasters, this loss of control has been hard to accept (Jenkins, 2006).
YouTube is not a site displaying specifically commercial content. Although there are those (annoying) commercials that play before certain videos, this is not the purpose of YouTube. If anything, it is a hindrance to the participatory element, since these components don’t add to the cultural conversation between videos. To seek to “manage” YouTube, and incorporate more of these culturally mute components into the service is to effectively kill of what YouTube means to the societal masses. And it is to these masses that YouTube belongs. While companies seek to establish a consumer culture, where existence in a society is characterized by overshadowing corporations controlling (paid for) content and experiences, YouTube represents the participatory antithesis of a society where experience, and even mundanity is valued, shared, and appreciated.