via apophenia I came across the disentanglement of the lonelygirl15 experiment …
|They are telling their story, truth or fiction. Of course, this makes many people very uncomfortable. They want blogs and YouTube and MySpace to be Real with a capital R. Or they want it to be complete play. Yet, what’s happening is both and neither. People are certainly playing but even those|
|who are creating “reality” are still engaged in an act of performance. They are writing themselves into being for others to interpret and the digital bodies that emerge often confound those who are doing the interpretation.|
… and the further thoughts and analysis on H.Jenkins’ blog which draws some interesting assoziations between further recent fake and blurring events which occur around or purposely deal with our uncertainty about the source and status of content within this new networked culture.
In his interesting post where he lists different examples of invention, reaction and playful commutation occuring due a culture of rapid turnover and constant change, describing this uncertainty and unpredictability as generative. Churn encourages the experimentation and innovation at the very heart of the creative process. Not forgetting to mention that .. we should also be prepared to accept impure motives and hybrid works that emerge at the nexus between different levels of cultural production. Interestingly enough the examples he brought up, like Danger Mouse, were on a certain level already reactions themselves to a lower level of pure ‘imitating something’ (faking).
UPDATE: it might be of interest to read the comments on this NYT blog in regard of the put question for readers:
Does the revelation of Lonelygirl15â€™s true identity as an actress change the way you will interpret amateur video online?