Características de las turberas

Selwyn (2004) points toward the importance of technological capital, which is concerned with the economic, social and cultural resources on which people can draw when engaging with ICTs as crucial for meaningful and sustained use of ICT and for enabling people to be producers rather than consumers. In addition he highlights that differences in access to technological capital have been identified as lying at the heart of the discourse of digital inequalities (Selwyn, 2004). Beyond the symbolic framing of social media as community reporting, cognitive and practical strategies for integrating the social practice of community reporting within specific contexts and communities are also in evidence at the organisational level. The cognitive dimension of domestication is concerned with the kind of competences “needed or created in the appropriation process” (Laegran, p.82, 2005) and the practical dimension is concerned with the ways in which technology is integrated within a cultural practice. I suggest that participation (through such cognitive and practical strategies) in the context of community reporting, may be understood as shaped and enabled additionally by a process and approach of introducing and building forms of technological cultural capital within the regeneration areas, through the digital inclusion launch pad of People’s Voice

Media. This may be understood in essence as a process of digital empowerment for content creation and sharing including within a community context.

Technological cultural capital is a term which refers to ICT, skills, knowledge and competencies which may be developed through formal and informal learning and also through “socialisation into technology” which can be understood as “exposure” to “techno- cultural goods” (Selwyn, 2004, p.355). PVM can be said to play a pivotal role in encouraging and facilitating sustained participation and thus developing such cultural forms of capital through a process of socialising people into and familiarising people with the technologies associated with social media and community content creation and sharing. This process of ‘socialisation’ into, and ‘familiarisation’ with the technologies associated with community reporting occurs through outreach work, community reporter training, social events, ‘meet ups’, volunteering opportunities and through dedicated social media centres of access to technological, economic and social forms of capital. Such a process of community domestication is effectively working to embed the social practice of community reporting within the two urban regeneration areas and beginning to create in essence a new social world that could be described as a community of community reporters. In what follows I seek to provide some illustrations of this process of ‘socialisation and familiarisation.’

The outreach work of PVM was likened “in advertising terms” to “creating demand in terms of raising the profile of what these tools can do and encouraging people to do it just as an activity” (anonymous staff member) and as such may hold some synergies with Schäfer’s, (2011) ‘selling utopia’ discourse. For example, PVM staff spend some time addressing “one of the biggest challenges” with regards to community engagement, that is “just letting people know that the technology has moved on and so it is quite user friendly...”:

“Teresa is very good at that, at saying, you know I didn’t know anything about social media or this world of putting your views up on the Internet but it is pretty easy and so when she says that, it’s pretty convincing” (Anonymous staff member).

Jess M, also described her ‘learning by disguise’ approach to engagement with older generations within the Edge Lane Allotments frame of community reporting who “didn’t really want much to do with me or my laptop and microphone or anything like that...”. She described the approach she takes in terms of locating something else that they are interested in, providing the example of when she asked an older member of the allotment group to show

her how to make a gingerbread cake and then simply “introduced a video camera”. Informal, flexible approaches to learning were also identified by a few respondents as important for those whom the school and classroom experience of learning may serve as a barrier to learning. Patrick emphasised throughout his interview the importance of the approach to training within the Edge Lane Allotments frame:

“I think the beauty of it is that the people from People’s Voice Media can come out to the site and do it in a relaxed atmosphere.”

“I think a few people have faced various challenges, some of the older generation, but the beauty of it is that they got round it and they seem to be getting round it and it’s just having to work at a slower place.”

“They work round the individual, which, a lot of individuals don’t like to be in a classroom. They don’t like to be stressed out or put in a lecture situation if they want to learn something. Some people like to shy away and say, well I would like to know how to do that, is there any way you can help me, and these people have done it. I think it has been great the way they have gone about it.”

Kevin also emphasised the importance of the training approach within his interview: “I think the staff. I mean there are only two members of staff here but they’re very, very patient, and the communication skills...I think it works on the level they’re at, because I’m not ready to work right away. My other option prior to this was going to a local college, which I did, but I was shoved in with a lot of 16-year-olds who were messing about, and there didn’t seem to be anywhere that fit where I was at. This fits someone who is out of work, sick, who wants to still use their skills and wants to be creative while they’re not being paid. But they can be flexible, because I don’t have to come in every day basically if I don’t want to. It’s up to me, and there’s no pressure. I think it’s pretty spot on the way they’re teaching. It seems to be not pushing but being a bit strict if I mess up or I don’t listen, or repeat the same thing. But a bit gentle as well, so you’re not feeling like you’re messing up really as much as you would if you were doing a college course and stuff. Because I’m aware that they know that I’m struggling sometimes, but it’s kind of working for me” (Kevin).

Once people enter the community reporter world of access to technological capital they are commonly exposed to and experience a wide variety of technologies for content capture, editing and distribution. One particularly novel and valued feature of the community reporter experience, linked to participatory decision making and sustained participation is the capacity to borrow and personally experiment with technologies of content capture, through the dedicated social media centres as illustrated in the quotations below. As Keith and Ruth

additionally pointed out this may be particularly important in a context of economic and digital disadvantage:

“The equipment here, isn’t as far as I am aware, isn’t accessible in many places, there are not many places you can go and say ‘Can I borrow a video camera for the weekend I’m going to make a film’ which is what I did twice...” (Kevin)

“I use my mobile phone but there is equipment available if you need it and a lot of different equipment as well which again especially if you don’t have the money like myself and you can’t afford to go and buy a camera or you’re not online which I’m not at home you know you don’t have the capacity to be online then without something like Salford Social Media you’d be stuck, so it’s vital really” (Keith).

“I’d wanted to get into film making but I’ve not had the equipment, money, skills...they’re good at lending equipment, they’re brilliant about lending equipment...even if you don’t have access to the Internet they provide it for you in their offices and they’re not like, ‘here you go get on with it, they’re there with you every step of the way” (Ruth).

“I have been given a video camera and a stand, a little tripod, which I don’t use that often because I just get out my mobile phone and take video clips and pictures and try and piece it all together with the little bit of knowledge I have gained...But I know they have got all sorts of equipment, if you are struggling with anything they are quite willing to even letting you keep the equipment for a short while till you get used to it in your own background. So it’s good in that respect, the tools are there” (Patrick).

Mike S also described the constant access to technological cultural capital through community reporter volunteering opportunities associated with enabling and driving participation in community content creation:

“We’ve had training courses and we’ve had training events, and the other thing that I would count as training is just recently, a few weeks ago, that Smart Cities conference that we went to…because it was like on the job training. Some people had voice recorders, some people had video cameras, some people were staffing the video booth... It was like it was a training event, as well as being an active example of being a community reporter. You know, community reporters in action, is on-going training. And I don’t think …my experience over the last, like, couple of years, is there’s never a point where you say, right, I know it now. Like, every time you do a new event or do a new bit of a training course, you learn something new. So, that’s what’s really good about it. It’s like a constant access to more stuff...”

“And I think what a year ago might have seemed complicated, once you start getting your hands on it you suddenly realise that there aren’t actually any limits about what you can do with these bits and pieces. You can get them on the computer, and you can start to edit them in lots of different ways, and then

ingredients and cooking lots of different kinds of cakes. And I think that’s what we’ve learnt.”

Mike S also identified clearly how building up familiarity with the various technologies of community reporting has developed both his and Jane’s confidence to utilise such technologies within the context of their community work and thus capacity to continue to participate within this arena, identifying that “...once you get started in a few of these skills you suddenly realise that you can do lots of other things...” and further that:

“One of the things that happened is we got a lot more confident about using equipment and we wouldn’t worry about somebody say, you know, here’s a recorder, go to that event. We can do that, because we’ve had enough familiarity with different types of recorders, cameras, video cameras...We had a desktop computer at home and plugging a video camera into that seemed like a real challenge for a long time and it’s only recently when we’ve thought about the fact, right we could go on...Like when we had this In Bloom event we went out, took some photos, put them on the computer; you know within an hour we had a little, some of the edited photos, up on the website and we never would have done that a year ago. So although we’d seen bits of equipment we’d never been confident enough about it before we got involved with PVM.”

Ruth also spoke of the value she placed on her exposure to and opportunities to use various technologies associated with community reporting which she may not have otherwise come into contact with which she links to enabling and inspiring further content creation orientated participation:

“I wouldn’t have come into contact with a lot of the technology and once you come into contact with it and use it a lot more it just becomes second nature to you. It gives you the opportunity to use and knowledge about different packages for example editing videos.”

“I would say that’s what they’ve done for me and they’ve given me new ideas as to what I can do, different ideas for making films I’d never think to do audio blog, with the more things that I’ve learnt the more I know is possible for me to do, I don’t feel restricted by what kind of medium I would do something in. Before I would think I just want to do film whereas now I can do photo diaries and just a wide variety of things and that in itself has increased my creativity.”

Paul A within the Victoria House framing of community reporting also expressed that the process has introduced him to technology which he said: “I wouldn’t even have come across or thought about coming across.”

Some of the community reporters emphasised the value of the social element of community reporting which also provide opportunities for socialisation into the associated technologies. Whenever I attended such social events and community reporter events such as the launch of Salford Internet TV, I found that there was always a wide variety of technologies of content capture and display present. Some community reporters valued the opportunity to discuss technology, such as the group at Victoria House who told me that their community reporter sessions often started with an informal conversation about technology and community reporting. Such informal discussions provide a key example of socialisation into the techno- culture of community reporting, as illustrated through David’s description of how these type of discussions work within the context of informal community reporter training:

“...the other level of support is people just being able to come in and maybe talk about projects. What will happen is you might spend half the session not necessarily getting anything practical done but it has been quite key because it’s been discussing things, it’s been people talking about their experiences. I think there again, the key thing there is about, you know, not viewing one person or yourself as an expert, it’s more like trying to bring other people’s influence in and saying, ‘well you know how would you deal with this story or what is the best way of recording this interview or taking this picture.”

Community reporter social events were also functioning on the level of socialisation into the technologies and social practice of community reporting and thus social media focused content creation and sharing. Such events appeared to be characterised by opportunities for community reporters to share and discuss their work, building up in the process exposure to, and familiarity with social media sharing platforms. During the focus groups organised by PVM, it was revealed that people wanted more opportunities for such informal social events and during and after my research I know that informal community meet ups had been set up. At a general level community reporters were clearly enjoying the social dimension of the role inherent in comments such as “I love the social aspect” and “I enjoy meeting people.” However, such social events also function subtlety as constant exposure to, and hence increasing familiarity with, the technologies and practices of community reporting.

The social media centres and in particular Salford Social Media Centre appeared to be functioning additionally as local community spaces within which technological cultural capital may thrive and as a potential space within which social media and community reporting as a participatory activity may come into view. Through ‘drop-ins’ and informal training the Salford Social Media Centre in particular, seemed to be acting as a local foci of

importantly the technological social capital, (most specifically staff and peer expertise and support) which seemed to be enabling and sustaining participation in the social practice. The Salford Social Media Centre and in particular the drop-ins in Salford were identified as highly valued resources among a number of community reporters as a physical meeting place for community reporters, a place to access equipment, support and form new social contacts The friendly, welcoming environment with cups of tea and helpful, supportive, approachable staff were particular social context factors of importance to the community reporters utilising the centre (Appendix C). Keith, for example said, “...just coming to the drop-ins on a Tuesday and Wednesday are vital and essential”. The patience and communication skills of staff were identified as particularly important for two participants facing health related barriers to technological learning, as John explains for example:

“They have taken someone who...knew nothing about media and trained me in sufficiently interesting videos...One thing which does need saying here is that I am damaged goods because of my accident and the people here have been very good at bearing in mind my problems and helping me with them...So they took someone who was severely damaged goods and taught him how to communicate the needs, aspirations, desires and successes of a community to the greater world out there and we really give Salford a world voice”

However, there were some indications that while the Social Media Centre in Salford was offering a significant social media focused local foci of access, the location and social environment of the centre may present barriers to wider community engagement in Salford., For example, during one of the PVM organised focus groups, a participant commented, “I think it would be daunting to just wander in off the street” (Mike S). Jane similarly said, “I think the building is a barrier…I’ve heard people say that the building puts them off”. A further perspective from a research participant not engaging with the Social Media Centre, (the Editor of the Salford Star) is illustrative of the view of potential location and