1GyAp2x

246 Patricia G. Lange and Mizuko Itothe relation between media production and consumption. Media theoristshave argued for decades that media “consumption” is not a passive actand that viewers and readers actively shape cultural meanings (Buckingham2000; Dyson 1997; Eco 1979; Jenkins 1992; Kinder 1999; Radway 1984;Seiter 1999b). Contemporary interactive and networked media make thisperspective difficult to ignore. Developments in the technology sector inthe past decade have pushed this understanding into common parlanceand consciousness. “Web 2.0,” “user-generated content,” “modding,” “prosumer,”1 “pro-am,” 2 “remix culture”—these buzz words are all indicatorsof how creative production at the “consumer” layer is increasingly seen asa generative site of culture and knowledge. A decade ago, creating a personalwebpage was considered an act of technical and creative virtuosity;today, the comparable practice of creating a MySpace profile is an unremarkableachievement for the majority of U.S. teens. As sites such asYouTube, Photobucket, and Flickr become established as fixtures of ourmedia-viewing landscape, it is becoming commonplace for people to bothpost and view personal and amateur videos and photos online as part oftheir everyday media practice. In turn, these practices are reshaping ourprocesses for self-expression, learning, and sociality.In the case of young people, new media production is framed by ongoingdebates about the appropriate role of media in young people’s lives. Ourdiscourse about media and creativity is framed by a set of cultural distinctionsbetween an active/creative or a passive/derivative mode of engagingwith imagination and fantasy. Generally, practices that involve local production—creativewriting, drawing, and performance—are consideredmore creative, agentive, and imaginative than practices that involve consumptionof professionally or mass-produced media—watching television,playing video games, or even reading a book. In addition, we commonlymake a distinction between active and passive media forms. One familiarargument is that visual media, in contrast to oral and print media, stiflecreativity, because they do not require imaginative and intellectual work.Popular media, particularly television, have been blamed for the stifling ofchildhood imagination and initiative; in contrast to media such as musicor drawing, television has often been demonized as a commercially driven,purely consumptive, and passive media form for children and youth.Media educators have argued for critical engagement with television andother forms of commercial media, developing programs that teach youth