That’s the Word for That: Crowdsourcing

It just seemed to fit. When I recently read, The Rise of Crowdsourcing, by Jeff Howe (Wired, 06 2006), I immediately knew that it was relevant to a forum discussion thread posted for my photography organization. Crowdsourcing is the act of outsourcing tasks, traditionally performed by an employee or, to a large group of people or community (a crowd), through an open call (Wikipedia). Following its controversial initial appearance in 2006, I accept that the term is not frequently used anymore. It’s complex, but, along with “citizen journalist,” says what needs to be said. Take note of the examples below and a few contentions.

On July 30, 2010, The New York Times, posted the following (excerpted) on the N.Y./Region page of their website (http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/30/cover-the-waterfront-this-means-you/):

"We want you to head out to your favorite waterfront spots … and send us photographs of what you see. We’re not looking for posed pictures (hi, Grandma) but for you to document the scene: human, animal, vegetable, mineral, other.
When we put all your images together, we hope they’ll form a mass portrait of one coastal moment in (summer) time, infinitely richer than any one study or newspaper story. They’ll be published on City Room next week, along with vignettes from a batch of student- and citizen-journalists we’ve enlisted to help out. (F.Y.I.: The resulting “waterfront portrait” can be found at: http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/06/the-waterfront-covered/)"

The weather was nice that weekend and I needed an outing. I decided to walk along the East River promenade nearest me. I share only with you a few images of the afternoon’s stroll.

I had first read about this “call-for-entry” on the forum from a member who said:

“I pass this along with great reservation. On the one hand this comes across as a cool way to involve the public in reportage of their communities. On the other, it is yet another horrifying wake-up call regarding harsh realities for professional photographers.
After all, why should a company pay for content when all they have to do, in order to be flooded with images, is put out a call over the Internet? They don't even have to pay a photo researcher to find existing photos!”

I don’t disagree, the point is well-taken. On one side, a business wishes to strengthen its brand and relationship with its readers. The New York Times, a large corporation, offers no compensation other than a possible opportunity to have an image appear on their website. On the other side, professional photographers have been affected by this trend in sourcing photographs. Over four years ago, the iStockphoto purchase by Getty Images, Inc., attested to improvements in digital cameras and the ease of transmission over the Internet. Many other companies are following the precedent set by Getty and others modifying their business strategies.

Browsing my tweets the same week, I read this offer from The Art Institute of Chicago:

"The two most important developments in photography in the first half of the 20th century were the emergence of lasting artistic traditions and the rise of mass-circulation picture magazines. Henri Cartier-Bresson was a leading figure in both domains. In celebration of [a] landmark retrospective, we invite you to participate in a Cartier-Bresson photo contest (by September 20, 2010) (This exhibit recently appeared in NY at the Metropolitan Museum of Art.)."

Cartier-Bresson is my favorite photographer. To my mind, the proffered prizes (except for the exhibition catalogue, I live in NY, not Chicago) are inconsequential compared to the prospect of a few of my images being reviewed by knowledgeable and dedicated curators. Yet, as with The New York Times, the contest is being held to enhance their brand and to build a better relationship with the photographic community (photos are to be uploaded to a Flickr group; official contest rules: www.artic.edu/aic/drawing_rules/drawing_rules.html).

I’ve become intrigued by the various points of view on the subject of crowdsourcing. I searched the Internet for other commentaries and learned that studies currently are being conducted, along with other efforts to validate the concept. By other names, of course. It applies not only to photographers, citizen journalist, businesses seeking new relevance, but to other areas utilizing communal labor to accomplish a task.

A person will participate in “calls-for-entry” for one of two reasons: for financial gain or for peer recognition. What differs is an elusive sense of fairness. Sending some images to The Art Institute of Chicago would not feel like a sell-out to me and it would not deprive a professional photographer of a job assignment. In fact, they can participate too.

I don’t want to put too much stress on something that is definitely evolving and will reach its own accommodation among parties in time and in a form amenable to all. Photographers, as well as businesses, will have to adapt themselves to dramatic changes in conducting business; and will have to take advantage of marketing opportunities offered by the Internet and new technologies. Comments welcome. Let me hear what you think.