This list hopes to facilitate access to full-length consumer research videographies screened previously in conferences (e.g. ACR, CCT, EMAC) or journals (e.g. CMC, QMR) over the last 10 years that are “free to view” online. I find it a common problem that many of the films are scattered around the net and difficult to find when needed. They are an excellent resource and certainly merit more attention – not to mention citations!
I reviewed all consumer research conference proceedings and journal special issues that I know have presented films. Then I tried my best to track down each film across video streaming sites or authors to see if they are available online (in full, free access). Please notify me if your film is still missing – I’d be happy to add all! I found a total of 33 films from 2005-2015. With an average 700+ views these films also prove they reach far beyond standard conference audiences.
Find here the full list (CLICK THE TITLE TO ACCESS FILMS):
Cléret, Baptiste (2015) “Street Corner Compromises” ACR
Hietanen, Joel and Joonas Rokka (2015) “Monstrous Organizing: The Dubstep Electronic Music Scene” CCT / ACR / EMAC
Bonnin, Gael, Alain Goudey and Marat Bakpayev (2014) “Meet the robot: Nao’s chronicle” ACR / EMAC
Rokka, Joonas, Pekka Rousi, and Vessi Hämäläinen (2014) “Follow me on dead media: analog authenticities in alternative skateboarding scene” ACR
van Laer, Tom, Luca Visconti and Stephanie Feiereisen (2014) “Need for narrative” ACR
Veer, Ekant (2014) “I am struggling: men’s stories of mental illness” ACR
Wijland, Roel (2014) “In brutal times” ACR
Myöhänen, Henri and Joel Hietanen (2013) “Entertained to excess: The contemporary practices of boredom” ACR
O’Sullivan, Stephen (2013) “What happens when brand evangelism meets entrepreneurship? Introducing the second tier tribal entrepreneur” EACR
Ramachandran, Giridhar (2013) “Consumption communities as third spaces” ACR
Rokka, Joonas, Baptiste Cléret and Alice Sohier (2013) “Entre-deux-mondes: the shaping of artistic projects in a local music scene” ACR
Seregina, Anastasia, Norah Cambell, Bernardo Figueiredo and Hannu Uotila (2013) “A Pen” ACR
Barretta, Paul and Yi-Chia Wu (2012) “Perceptions of music authenticity” ACR
Viitala, Karolus and Hietanen, Joel (2012) “Differing everydays – Planning and emergence in contemporary mundane routines” ACR
Hietanen, Joel, Joonas Rokka, and Risto Roman (2011) “Pushing the scene – tensions and emergence in an accelerated marketplace culture” ACR / EACR
Hu, Anne and Curtis Haugvegt (2011) “Changing consumer behavior in diet and health” ACR
Uotila, Hannu and Joel Hietanen (2011) “Post-materialist work: Emerging self-actualization in the video industry” ACR
Caldwell, Marylouise and Ingeborg Kleppe (2010) “Walk the talk: Living positive with HIV” ACR
Castano, Raquel, Maria Eugenia Perez and Claudia Quintanilla (2010) “Cross-border shopping: family narratives” Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, 45-57.
Cherrier, Hélène and Tresa Ponnor (2010) “Trash in the eye of the beholder” Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, 8-23.
Rabikowska, Marta (2010) “Whose street is it anyway? Visual ethnography and self-reflection” Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, 58-83.
Webster, Cynthia, Richard Seymour and Kate Dallenbach (2010) “Behind closed doors: opportunity identification through observational research” Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, 24-35.
Eckhardt, Giana and Andreas Bengtsson (2009) “Naturalistic group interviewing in China” ACR / (2010) Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, 36-44.
Fleck, Joao Pedro, Carlos Rossi and Nicolas Tonsho (2009) “Vinileiros” ACR
Rokka, Joonas, Joel Hietanen and Kristine DeValck (2009) “Brothers in paint: a practice-oriented inquiry to tribal marketplace culture” ACR
Caldwell, Marylouise and Paul Henry (2008) “Urban archetypal hedonistas” ACR / (2010) Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, 84-96.
Veer, Ekant (2008) “This day is to be special: The role of exaggerated contrast in the Indian wedding” ACR
Henry, Paul and Marylouise Caldwell (2007) “A right to life: reducing maternal death in Pakistan” ACR
Kjeldgaard, Dannie and Jacob Östberg (2007) “Coffee Grounds and the Global Cup” Consumption Markets and Culture, Vol. 10, No. 2, 175-187.
Caldwell, Marylouise and Paul Henry (2006) “Headbanging as resistance or refuge?” ACR
Ulusoy, Ebru (2006) “Not Desperate Houswives”, ACR
Bengtsson, Andreas, Jacob Östberg and Dannie Kjeldgaard (2005) “Prisoners in paradise: subcultural resistance to the marketization of tattooing” Consumption Markets and Culture, Vol 8, No. 3, 261-274.
Bergvall, Sven and Jacob Östberg (2005) “Burning Bock” ACR
Academic videography productions taking some important steps this week as the film festival was introduced to European Marketing Academy’s yearly conference for the first time. This is excellent news making it possible for filmmakers to submit their work to number of major venues. In addition to ACR conference (Association for Consumer Research) – where the pioneering film work has become a staple feature since 2002 – other options at the moment include for example CCT (Consumer Culture Theory conference), AFM (French Marketing Association) and JNRC (French consumer research conference). This is absolutely great, and we really hope spread even further. Next major conference to invite videographies is the Winter AMA 2016 (American Marketing Assoc). Please send your work!!
The EMAC film track where we joined offered five very nice films touching topics as diverse as consumers’ need for narratives, heterotopic tourist experiences, robots, and electronic music markets. Find the film trailers behind the link here. Our film is a completely new edit of our previously made, award-winning Pushing the Scene (2011) film with a specific focus on exploring how contemporary music scenes and markets come into being and dissipate and how they are negotiated in a complex relationship between the marginal and the mainstream, commercial interests, technologies and ideologies. We conceptualize this evolution in the film as “monstrous organizing” and thus extend prior market and consumer research studies on market dynamics. Check the trailer here (we will make the full film available later): https://vimeo.com/127473931
The ACR Film Festival hits off again in two weeks time with new exciting consumer research films.
Here’s a teaser for our latest contribution. Follow Me on Dead Media is a piece exploring the “turn to analog” as a particular countercultural movement addressing the ever digitalizing mediascape. The study is based on recent fieldwork in skateboarding scene in Helsinki.
See you in Baltimore!
Ps. The entire film will be posted here after the conference (24.-26.10.2014).
Are you about to engage in the business of doing academic films? Or do you already have a nearly finished film project on desktop? Before you move on, here are some key considerations that you should take into account that may help you in overcoming some of the most common challenges in film production. The insights are based on reflections and discussion from ACR 2011 special session on “making better video ethnographies”, chaired by Paul Henry and Marylouise Caldwell (University of Sydney).
As increasing number of academics are planning and doing academic videographies – i.e. academic research on video format – it is worthwhile to consider some common themes that often have a significant impact on the success of such projects, especially in the case where the researcher’s aim is to produce ethnographies on video. Among these, we feel that following points should be acknowledged.
Composition of the research team
Although we believe that it is possible to do academic films also as solo projects, we think that having a team may offer several benefits. Most importantly, simply the act of filming and interviewing at the same time is rather hard – especially if you want to use several cameras and points of view. So having multiple members in a team will help. The second most important consideration could be whether you want to make one of your key informants (i.e. insiders in your research scene) a team member too. Our own experience with the films ‘Pushing the Scene’ and ‘Brothers in Paint’ has been that “insider member” is like having a guarantee for your film success. Building your film on a dialogue between your key informants is way more interesting than more direct Q&A style of interviewing between the researcher and the researched. This leads us into the second key point:
Access to informants / phenomenon
Doing ethnography means having access into a (cultural) phenomenon and people in it. Although as in any ethnographic project, we believe that when shooting video, this aspect becomes even more challenging. Pulling a camera out in an interview situation may scare people off and make them nervous. Here also having an insider member may help significantly.
Storytelling in video
Making academic films is always a business of building a compelling story and showing evidence on your topic/argument. However, telling a compelling story on film vs. academic paper is something that we should investigate and practice further on. It seems that filmmakers tend to rely on storytelling tactics common to academic papers – something which may not necessarily work out as well on film. Here, watching what documentary filmmakers (and why not other similar artists) are doing may prove helpful. For example, think about different ways of showing emotion, affect, and contrast on film! In addition, embedding your story into an authentic material and spatiotemporal context is a crucial yet difficult task.
Theory building and linking
Should your film include theory or references to prior research? Yes. The business of academic film production is always a business of building theory and/or linking your study within wider interpretive frames that stand on existing research/literature. Of course, again, there are different ways of doing this and we believe that references to others’ work can be done in a discrete manner (and just a personal tip – it’s not a very good idea to show the article or book cover in the film!), employing either voiceover or text on film. In addition, it is also inevitable to communicate your conclusions / contributions to theory – something that STILL seems to be missing from some of the films. Using visualization and graphical (and why not symbolic as well) expression here is a good idea.
Voice of god or talking heads? How to narrate and communicate your story? Common trend in documentary filmmaking is the use of “voice of god” type of voiceover which explains what the film is about and what happens in it etc. We think that here filmmakers could be more creative and reflective in their approach. We wrote about this point in an recent article (it can be found in my thesis, page 128-151).
Yes, it seems that you cant plan enough for successful film production! This is a very good point brought up by Marylouise and Paul. Not to mention having enough battery and memory in your cam, there are different ways you can also script and blueprint your film beforehand. This saves you energy and time. Think about which sections, arguments, locations, sites and key informants you actually need in the final film. And finally, don’t forget to shoot b-reel film. It can save you in a number of ways once you get into the editing phase.
And the list continues… hope you find these helpful! Thanks for the participants in the session ;)
Ok, I lied. The concept of hiatus does not apply if one considers anything that we’ve been up to not pertaining specifically to this blog. What has now been going down behind the curtains has consisted of voluminous amounts of editing (my screen-glaring eyes look kinda funny now and the silver fox proportions of my integrated toupée have certainly been on the increase). The outcome consists of two ‘Film Festival’ submissions to ACR 2011 which I’ll be linking to when the review process has amounted to something tangible. Let’s see how those work out – fingers crossed!
The other submission (not the ‘Pushing the Scene’ -project that we’ve already documented below) we call ‘Post-Materialistic Work’ was a do-over of one of my Master’s thesis group students research. I’m glad to say he became the first Master’s student to graduate with a videography as the primary product – perhaps the first in the world from field of economics (his videography thesis was in the field of entrepreneurship, but the video data was reincarnated into a work of consumer culture theory in consumer research after quite a bit of revamping). So yes, one can now conduct a Master’s thesis as a work of videography in the Aalto University School of Economics in the marketing program! Within the nascent project MediaMark I have four such ongoing research initiatives. You’ll hear more about them soon enough!
To get things going again I just wanted to brazenly display some of our new gear. As we are still obvious amateurs our gear bag seems to forever be in a state of emergent flux. Here we are at the moment:
(From left to right, somewhat) Handytools Base-X, Rode SM3, Audio-Technica AT875R, Canon 60D, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC Macro, Rode Stereo Mic, Sigma 15mm F2.8 EX DG Diagonal Fisheye, Canon 550D/T2i, Zoom H4, Redrock/Ops Running Man
(From left to right, somewhat) Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG APO Macro HSM II, Joby Gorillapod SLR, Silk Monopod 350, JVC GY-HM100U, Glidecam 2000
Our Canon 550D running the magical Magic Lantern software (with AGC disabled, audio meters, focus peak and zebras)!
Let’s see if these new babies will bring about a much anticipated improvement in quality (if I’ll ever be able to master any of them with my butterfingers).
I’ll be back with other news shortly on this same bat channel!
In addition to the themes covered in the previous posting, here’s to summarize some of this year’s sessions (with a couple of notes linking to our own project). The themes included: new research methods, postmodern and ethnic consumption, challenges linked to public goods/services, class dynamics and consumption, consumer culture in third world countries, consumer resistance/culture jamming, culture and ideology, market-mediated relationships, the contested notion of place that shapes consumer experiences, femininity, consumer-marketer co-creation, community and family, mediated images and ideologies of body and health, consumer identity practices, critical questions on consumer culture terminology, and finally, socio-cultural construction of authenticity — session where we presented this time.
I particularly liked the session on new methods. Visual Analysis (VA) was explored as a tool for gaining cultural insight on consumer behavior and practices. Kristen San Jose presented a piece in which she applied VA in the context of fashion consumption in Tokyo. Although there’s a long tradition of visual research in CCT, I agree that there’s plenty of future opportunities in this regard. For instance, researchers (and companies alike) often rely on text-based analyses. For us, it would be interesting to extend VA also towards moving images / video, something I haven’t seen yet. Adding nicely to the session, Alex Thompson’s presentation brought about interesting views on how companies perceive and conceptualize consumers, in a study where commercial ethnography was the focus. I liked the way in which video was used as a means to communicate consumer knowledge to company executives — this nicely contrasts with more traditional ppt presentations and figures we’re used to. Alex’s points about different mechanisms at play, including rituals, embodiment and symbols, are something video really can capture in an intriguing way.
Another interesting session set out to re-conceptualize the contested notion of place. Drawing insights from material culture theory, Jeppe Trolle Linnet’s presentation shed light on material and social aspects of place and space in the context of home and homeyness (what he called ‘hygge’ in Danish). It was interesting to see how this hygge is constructed and negotiated in different settings, not only at home but also in other social places such as neighborhoods or communities. They act as a sort of social comfort zone, a cozy, warm, and safe environment that is distinguished from other non-hyggelig, cold, and modern places. In a closely related study Zeynep Arsel and Jonathan Bean presented on ‘apartment therapy’ — a conduct in which people modify their homes through interior design to better match their desires. In our own research we’re also interested in how such interlinked and mediated cultural spaces and sites are at play.
In the co-creation session, several papers sought to understand the cultural dialogue and co-creation between consumers and producers/marketers. Robert Harrison presented a fascinating paper on Black Friday – a sort of corporate ritual and event which is largely the result of consumer’s active participation during a consumption event. Another really nice paper was by Daiane Scaraboto and Rob Kozinets who investigated the community of geo-cacaching — a sort of GPS treasure hunt game invented and organized by consumers. This study showed how consumer’s infinite innovative potential, playfulness, and creativity plays an important role in the creation of a new markets — exactly what we’re also seeing our own study.
Finally, our own session in which authenticity was explored as an essential component and a driver of culture. I think the session was very interesting as it nicely brought together three distinct viewpoints on authenticity — namely brand, place, and consumption-production interplay. As it was noted, in consumer research authenticity is often investigated by looking at consumer perceptions, and it is commonly tied to certain objects (e.g. brands), lifestyles, or places. In our presentation on electronic music culture, we wanted to consider how authenticity — which often drives cultural change in (music) culture — is actually achieved and negotiated by different influential cultural agents. In our study these agents in fact simultaneously adopt the role of producers, DJs, and consumers. We also brought with us our new research team member Risto (aka Desto) who is an authoethnographic member in our research team and a DJ/producer himself. This move was very well received, and we had lots of lively discussions after our presentation. Thanks for everyone involved!
Overall this fifth annual CCT conference pointed out many interesting future directions. Especially, the increasing attention to spatial and embodied aspects of culture as well as emphasis on creative methodologies — including audiovisual and multi-method approaches — brings to the fore new thrilling work that is currently emerging.
Joonas and I just attended CCT5, consumer culture theory conference in Madison, Wisconsin, held at the Grainger Center of the University of Wisconsin’s Wisconsin School of Business. Attendees consist of academics interested in cultural research in the field of marketing and consumer research. We presented a preliminary account of our new videography project, ‘Pushing the Scene’, in which we attempt to build rich accounts of the negotiation of the social constructs of authenticity in the dubstep electronic music subculture. The newest member of our research team, Risto Roman, was also present to bring further insight into the cultural realm of dubstep (Risto produces and DJs under the alias Desto).
Like Rob Kozinets has already pointed out in his insightful blog postings, this was the best CCT yet. From my humble vantage point of having attended approximately 20 conferences in international contexts, I can do nothing else than to wholeheartedly agree! Indeed, the presentations and discussions were of high quality, but I must also emphasize what consists of the true magic of the CCT gatherings – the laid-back atmosphere and the truly engaging conversations that occur beyond the conference agenda (yes, this would also entail the great parties this year and before). A special shout-out must go out to Rob, Alex Thompson, Marylouise Caldwell, Paul Henry, Handan Vicdan and Sofia Ulver-Sneistrup along with others making up our outgoing posse. Good times, good times. Like the saying goes, this trip was not one of economy or its health-promoting qualities.
Coming back to Rob’s blog, he has already provided an in-depth account of the conference and its contributions (and rumors and some minor controversy). What happened in the first session was that Eric Arnould called for the cessation of case studies in the CCT field. The discussion developed into relatively voluminous amounts of spilled digital ink (see also the comments in Rob’s blog) about what became resolved as an issue of conceptualization. This approach is further clarified by Robert Kozinet’s following point “…ethnography leave unclear what the difference is between “single” and “not-single”. From my perspective, there thus seems to be more agreement than not on the larger issue, which would naturally have to do with the further work of legitimizing CCT research in general. This task can be undertaken by further development of a focus in robust theoretizations and deep ethnographic takes. Certainly, if scholarly work in our field remains primarily focused on a description, we we stand to lose a lot of our potential. From my perspective, especially one that is now fortified with encouraging experiences in the CCT5, the general ethos of the CCT crowd is exactly doing this, moving to the direction of emphasis on theoretical work and (even) more holistic approaches into various consumption contexts.
Another thoroughly interesting moment was the luncheon keynote on Friday by John Deighton, the editor of Journal of Consumer Research (JCR), the most prestigious journal in all scholarly things consumer. One of the core insights he shared was the increasing need to consider the impact of CCT for managers – i.e. what can CCT offer in the practice of companies’ marketing efforts. Indeed, it seems, that the cultural side of the matter is becoming increasingly recognized by companies also (e.g. Proctor & Gamble, Nokia), and therefore we must contemplate our role in this transformation. This provides opportunities for interesting shifts in ethos, as many CCT scholars with their close affiliation to the critical marketing discourse have traditionally not been closely tied to the managerial end of things. Perhaps, as cultural insight becomes increasingly relevant for companies, they will also provide us with more interesting opportunities for cooperation to bring in thought that has less to do with the reduction of the consumer into a number and more to do with holistic and co-creative approaches. Thus, we CCT researchers must remain ever vigilant in reminding ourselves to keep and open mind and readily pursue these opportunities as they emerge. Perhaps, in the future, there may be new openings for positions of chief cultural officers, as McCracken calls it.
Regarding the contributions of the CCT crowd in JCR, Deighton gave us some juicy morsels along with more sobering accounts and suggestions for the future of CCT research. Now, it must be remembered, that even with the encouraging growth of the CCT tradition, we are still far from being a firmly established and traditional field – some would certainly refer to us as still being on the fringe. For these reasons it was truly inspiring to have Deighton tell us that CCT accounts for much of very interesting and high-quality research in the journal. Thus, he contended, we CCT scholars have (in terms of the number of researchers in the field) become ‘over-represented’ in the journal. However, he continued, with growth comes responsibility and the need strategize and find ally discourses in academia. One such promising field could certainly be anthropology, with their ongoing trends of becoming increasingly interested in subcultural phenomena and becoming less ‘realist’ and more interpretative and reflexive.
While Deighton’s insights are certainly valuable for our field – indeed we need to display a more cohesive whole to become more distinctly recognizable – it is my belief that CCT’s somewhat Feyerabendian approach of (virtually) ‘anything goes’ has and will continue to be a source of interesting research and creativity. Naturally, this ‘anything goes’ does not mean complete ontological and epistemological relativism here, but rather denotes the ongoing freedom to pursue social phenomena from diverse theoretical perspectives and a relatively liberal methodological toolkit. Social phenomena will continue on to consist of equally diverse constructs – constantly negotiated, constantly evolving – and thus we can certainly draw form a tradition promoting freedom and courage in our work.
Anyway, thank you CCT for a fantastic experience. See you guys in EACR London in a couple of weeks. Meanwhile, we’ll hang out in the Big Apple to continue our project of exploring the negotiation of authenticity in the electronic music subculture of dubstep. Lots of film to capture! Joonas will provide a more detailed account of the presentations in the conference, and I’ll be sure to jot down an account of our experiences in NYC also.
My inspiration for video research was spurred by a few occurrences that took place in 2006-7. Firstly, I had just jumped on to my doctoral studies at the Helsinki School of Economics (currently known as Aalto University School of Economics) the previous year and was anxiously looking for new potential topics for my thesis work. I soon discovered that I needed to look outside of Finland to be able to find something interesting.
As it happened, I found myself first on an intensive course on Consumer Culture Theory (Odense, Denmark) headed by some of the most renowned figures in cultural consumer research, including Eric Arnould and Craig Thompson. The course instantly set the tone for my future work: I was caught to study the cultural aspects of consumption and consumer society from emerging approaches that stem largely from cultural anthropology and sociology.
Not long after, I took part in my first research congress: the 2nd Consumer Culture Theory Conference 2007 (at York University). This annual conference was organized for researchers employing qualitative, interpretive, ethnographic, videographic, netnographic and phenomenological approaches, in other words, in many ways emerging, if not completely novel approaches considering the dominant corpus of work within consumer and marketing research.
CCT conference was a success in many ways, not least because it also offered conjoined workshops designed for new students entering the field. I took part in the Video Ethnography Workshop, which was held for the third time. The purpose of this two-day workshop was to experience videographic research in a hands-on manner, guided by experts. After opening lectures on video-based research production, student teams were given camcorders and editing software as well as professional assistance for designing a small-scale video study in practice. By the end of the workshop we also presented our videos and received feedback.
During the assignment I ran into my future co-author, Kristine de Valck from HEC Paris. We conducted a video study in a local shopping mall interviewing and observing consumers about their personal styles. We got to experience some on-field action and stumbled upon a number of challenges typical for video research including 1) the difficulty of gaining access to people in such public environments and 2) the trouble of presenting camera in interview settings without scaring people away instantly. Despite of these, we managed to shoot some footage that we could edit and produce into a short film – my first videographic experiment.
The videography event was organized by Russell Belk and Robert Kozinets who have written several articles and book chapters about video research (see Belk and Kozinets 2005; Kozinets and Belk 2006). They have also founded the Association for Consumer Research Film Festival. Held annually in the North American ACR conference and in rotating years in Europe, Latin America and Asia Pacific, the film festival has spawned considerable interest among consumer researchers now for over 9 years.
As soon as the workshop was behind, I began to ponder how video research could work out for me. What is it good for? What makes it so compelling? Why hasn’t it been used previously? What new avenues could be opened up? Soon Kristine asked, if I could join her in Paris and to come up with a brand new video project. I knew this would be the perfect chance, so I was in…
Belk, R.W. & Kozinets, R.V. (2005) Videography in Marketing and Consumer Research. Qualitative Market Research, 8, 128-141.
Kozinets, R.V. & Belk, R.W. (2006). Camcorder Society: Quality Videography in Consumer and Marketing Research. In Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods in Marketing, R.W. Belk (ed), Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.