UGC. Empowering or Exploiting?

Web 2.0 is often considered a technology that has the ability to subvert capitalism by

giving us all the ability to create. But User Generated Content is be

ing used by organisations to produce profit, the content creator obtains in no economic benefit. Are UGC platforms merely a well disguised continuation of this capitalist structure?

Essentially various organisations use UGC platforms to encourage people to create economically valuable content. Flickr, Facebook, and many other companies have recognised that by providing tools to produce, they can maintain ownership over the resulting products. As owners of the interface, they own the content created using it. This content contributes to the quality of their site, pulling more viewers hence enabling the owner to advertise and generate profit. Citizen journalism sites such as CNN iReport are typical examples – unabashedly displaying adverts next to freely created news articles. User generated content can also be used separately to benefit the organisation such as in a video advertising campaign like Doritos. It seems that web 2.0 may have democratised production by allowing the process to be carried out by all, but economic rewards are still concentrated to few

- CNN iReport - An example of a Canon advertisement alongside a user generated news story

But is this really exploitation? This critique has some merit, but it undervalues the incentives and the rewards that individuals gain from creating UGC; self-expression, peer appreciation and potential career benefits

Ideally, the internet needs a system to ensure that everyone who wants to participate in the cash economy of UCG is given that option.

Maybe something along the lines of a 'Freemium' business model? However, the application of Freemium or a model similar is unlikely to satisfy all. The creation of a way to monitor the economic return of UGC that appeases individuals, companies, and appeals to social norms would be complex, maybe even impossible.