Curating Liveness: The Role of YouTube in Constructing Authentic Viewing Experiences Through Live Music Channels
Master’s Thesis by Anika Doshi
MA Media Studies — New Media and Digital Culture June 2019
Supervisor: Dr. G.C Mueller
Abstract
The plethora of music platforms made available by new media has led to the re-structuring of music consumption whereby live music is no longer confined to concert halls and music venues but can instead be enjoyed from behind the comfort of a screen. Given that this experience is changing, what enables live music channels to construct these experiences and who shapes such virtual ‘liveness’? This study answers these questions by investigating the role of YouTube in shaping authentic viewing experiences. Building on existing scholarly research and key theories relating to platform studies, performance studies and popular music, it explores how live music channels on YouTube construct liveness as a form of authenticity. Based on a content analysis of twenty videos from YouTube channels COLORS and La Blogothèque - selected for their unique yet different aesthetic techniques of curation, results indicated that for liveness to be perceived as authentic, specific criteria need to be included which while reflecting liveness, does not necessarily have to be live at all. In doing so, this study contributes towards academic discussion regarding evolving music
consumption patterns and consequently aims to instil focus on building organic relationships between the artist and audience through new media platforms.
Keywords
Acknowledgements
I would first like to thank my thesis advisor Dr. Gavin Mueller at the University of
Amsterdam for encouraging me to write about an area that I was deeply passionate about and for steering me in the right direction every step of the way. I would also like to thank my reader Dr. Tim Highfield for taking the time to read my thesis.
This past year has provided me with valuable knowledge that has enabled me to develop a critical approach to new media and broadened my horizon. For that, I would also like to thank the faculty at the New Media and Digital Culture track at the University of Amsterdam. Finally, I must express my profound gratitude to my parents and sister for providing me with unwavering support and encouragement throughout the course of my academic career and during the process of researching and writing this thesis. This undertaking would not have been possible without you. Thank you.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ... 4
1.1 From the Stage to the Screen ... 4
1.2 Contextualizing Digital Relationships ... 5
1.3 Contextualizing Digital Music Platforms ... 7
1.4 Focus of this Study and Rationale ... 8
1.5 Thesis Structure ... 9
2.0. Mapping the evolution of Music Commodities: From the Phonograph to Streaming ... 11
2.1. Music has a marketplace ... 12
2.2. Breakthroughs and World War II ... 13
2.3. Breaking boundaries ... 14
2.4. The Contemporary Landscape of Live Music ... 16
2.5. Staging Liveness: Liveness in a digital context ... 17
2.6. YouTube and Participation: Critical Findings from the Field of Platform Studies ... 19
2.7. Popular Music and Authenticity ... 22
2.8. YouTube and Technology ... 23
3.0. Theoretical Framework ... 26
3.1. Curating the live ... 26
3.2. Intimacy, Spontaneity, Relational Labour and Immediacy ... 28
3.3. Natural is best: Audio in a live context ... 30
3.4. Authentically Broadcasted: YouTube and Authentic Content ... 32
3.5. Constructing the Popular: Participation on YouTube ... 35
3.6. Subliminal Branding and Liveness: a new ecosystem ... 36
4.0. Methodology ... 39
4.1. Channel Selection ... 39
4.2. Data Analysis ... 41
4.3. Concepts to be analysed ... 41
5.0 Findings and Discussion ... 43
5.1 Curating Liveness: Key findings from YouTube channels COLORS & La Blogothèque ... 43
5.2 Mediating the visual experience: camera angles, editing and aestheticism ... 43
5.3 Staging Spontaneity ... 47
5.4 When Audio Goes Live ... 50
5.5 Notes on Intimacy: Striking a Balance ... 51
5.6 YouTube’s participatory culture ... 53
5.7 The live surpasses the record: the reception of the authentic experience ... 55
1. Introduction
1.1 From the Stage to the Screen
“Because live performance is the category of cultural production most directly affected by the dominance of media, it is particularly urgent to address the situation of live performance in our mediatized culture”.
—Philip Auslander, Liveness: Performance in a Mediatized Culture 43
The impact of networked digital platforms has manifested itself in a myriad of ways – one of which includes the practices and experience of media consumption. Over time, music has been subject to various technological and structural transitions, many of which have been so seamless in their appeal to our senses that they have gone unnoticed. One of these areas is live music. Live music has proliferated itself from the stage to the screen, enabling the
possibility of instantly accessible footage in ways that never existed before. This has led to an inherent alteration within the very social and cultural fabric of live music, particularly the ‘where’ and ‘when’ aspect of the way in which music is consumed and simultaneously, the perception of the professional musician and their audience. As an article by The Verge aptly explains “so much of what we see on our screens and hear on our stereos is processed to the point of genial blandness. But someone stepping up to a microphone and singing in front of cameras can still feel urgent and real, no matter how well-rehearsed the show is” (Murray n. pag.). In this way, liveness presents several appealing characteristics to modern audiences through its profoundly engaging nature, an essential component of the contemporary music landscape.
Simon Frith cites Keith Negus in his 2007 article ‘Live Music Matters’, who argues based off his historical survey of music on British television, that music and television professionals have tended to treat television as a neutral lens, rather than a transformative medium which could redefine or develop innovative kinds of musical performances (Frith 8). Today, this perception has drastically changed and new media platforms are viewed primarily as transformative media which bear innovative capacity to deliver live streamed concerts, pre-recorded ‘live sessions’ and popular music shows that are instantly accessible to the contemporary music audience. Most significantly, the live music industry continues to thrive economically; Statista forecasts a rise of $9 billion to almost $12 billion in the US live music industry between the period 2015 to 2021 (Live Music - Statistics & Facts. Statista).
complementary to recordings (Krueger 26). With live concerts being subject to such profound popularity, combined with the adaptation to numerous new media formats, it is imperative to explore the implications of changing music consumption patterns for modern audiences.
While new media formats range from dedicated apps, music-oriented cable channels, video subscription services and an abundance of websites (Murray n. pag.), there is one platform that stands outs from its competitors. As an invaluable database of audio-visual content, YouTube serves as a “virtual coffee house” for users with the opportunity to gather with likeminded individuals to discuss ideas, art and music (Cayari 9). Founded in February 2005, YouTube has quickly emerged as the world’s most popular video site (Davidson 293). YouTube provides a forum for people to watch, discover and share original video content created by users; as a result, the platform acts as a distribution platform for content creators whose goal is to keep users engaged and entertained by finding high quality videos relevant to their interests (Davidson 293).
In doing so, the interface has made possible, the creation of ‘channels’ that curate videos of interest in a range of genres ranging from cooking, to dance, comedy and even film reviews. Amongst the multitude of genres is live music performance. Moreover, the
possibilities of the video sharing interface are so extensive that the platform enables an onslaught of professionally generated content masterfully designed by producers, editors, sound engineers and camera people who, for the purpose of this study, will be referred to as ‘mediators’ or ‘middlemen’. With this in mind, this research aims to investigate the role of YouTube in creating authentic viewing experiences through live music channels.
1.2 Contextualizing Digital Relationships
“The final consideration is how the traditional perception of ‘live’ music, specifically the idea that it is through live performance, that the artist-audience relationship is
maintained in a digital information age.”
— Angela Jones and Rebecca Bennett, The Digital Evolution of Live Music 56
Heidi Partti argues in her book Learning from Cosmopolitan Musicians, “Just as a natural habitat reflects the learning of the species, a digital habitat is not just a configuration of technologies, but a dynamic, mutually defining relationship that depends on the learning of the community” (Partti 18). It is this power of collective participation combined with the attraction of that which is ‘authentic’ that provides cultural producers with the perfect advantage - to capitalize on liveness through flawless curation. This is something Philip
Auslander emphasizes in his book Liveness: Performance in a Mediatized Culture; he states that “paradoxically, the most successfully spontaneous forms of performance may be those in which spontaneity is relatively planned and predictable” (Auslander 64). However, while such statements shed light on the influence of ‘mediators’ within the music industry, little research has been conducted on the impact of such mediation on the virtual audience.
The plethora of live music channels on platforms such as YouTube have re-structured not only key structural aspects but also the phenomenological aspects of live music
consumption. Our perception of what is true or ‘authentic’ is no longer based on a separation between virtual and reality, but rather a recognition of reality within the virtual. As we continue to move further into the twenty-first century, the development of new technologies that influence music consumption is imminent and recognizing the wider implications of such changing consumption practices is essential in a world where “tomorrow’s popular site may not even be created yet” (Cayari 24). The initial instances of this can already be seen in the changed format and accessibility of music videos, specifically those depicting mashups, tributes and performances in innovative ways (Cayari 24).
Additionally, with 2018 witnessing new legislation such as the ‘music modernization act’1 the process of profiting from streamed music on digital platforms has become
profoundly easier for the artist (Deahl n. pag.). What this indicates is a shift towards increasingly ‘online’ interactions between artist and fan. Nancy Baym, in her 2018 book
Playing to the Crowd talks about this changed relationship. She states that “Where once the
audiences for mass music had no ‘real’ relationship with powerful and distant performers, today musicians relentlessly seek relationships with audiences, following listeners from platform to platform, trying to establish a presence for themselves and build connections” (Baym 1). In the increasingly digital landscape of today, investigating the grounds upon which these relationships are built and the extent to which they are objectively formed is significant for new media research.
1 Music Modernization Act – The Music Modernization Act (MMA) has been signed into law by President Trump. The bill,
broadcasted by musicians, labels and politicians streamlines the process of music-licensing and makes it easier for rights holders to be paid when their music is streamed. The Verge
1.3 Contextualizing Digital Music Platforms
“It is seemingly through the visceral moment, or ‘event’ experience, that some effective economic model and artistic centrality can be sustained. However, the internet, as a system, and our sharing practices have also been impacted in this experiencing of the moment.”
— Angela Jones and Rebecca Bennett, The Digital Evolution of Live Music 56
Soon after the birth of social media, platforms such as MySpace and Facebook had a prominent say in determining where audiences would go to learn about an artist, listen to their music and find out about performances (Cornell n. pag.). In 2019, this has dramatically changed and is embodied in the numerous file sharing and music promotion platforms such as Spotify, iTunes, Soundcloud, Bandcamp, Vimeo, Tidal and the object of this study –
YouTube. Additionally, a Google search on ‘platforms for music’ is enough proof that these platforms do not merely exist, but that people, especially musicians, are constantly curious to learn more about how they can work in their favour. From the 241 million results that were generated from my search query, some of the results included articles and blog posts with titles such as ‘Top 13 music streaming platforms on which you should upload your song’ on Medium.com, ‘Top 10 digital platforms to upload, share and promote your music’ on SonicBids Blog and ‘10 music discovery platforms you need to know about’ on Cambridge Audio (Rani; Bernsen; Cambridge Audio).
Moreover, with the advent of tools such as big data analytics combined with the power of global reach, streaming companies have enabled artists to compress and leverage their presence online in ways that non-musical social media platforms have not been previously able to do (“How Streaming Platforms Are Changing Music Promotion and Discovery.” TuneCORE). This has resulted in a $17.3 billion revenue in global recorded digital music in 2017 (IFPI: Global Music Report 2018). Taking these factors into
consideration, future directions could imply ‘free’ models as a significant part of recorded music. With such profound accessibility, the reception of liveness presents a significant object of research and understanding the implications of such drastic changes in music consumption is a key area of concern for the present study; which will be further defined and outlined in the following section.
1.4 Focus of this Study and Rationale
This study sets out to identify contemporary constructions of liveness through a comprehensive critique of live music channels on YouTube. In the process of doing so, it raises prominent questions regarding musicians bound by the ever-changing norms of a heavily mediatized music industry. Additionally, it hopes to promote awareness about audiences who remain blind to the numerous middlemen who have a prominent say in the strategic shaping of modern liveness. Delving into this issue through an integrated approach of relevant theories and case studies will enable contemporary audiences to develop a more nuanced and holistic understanding of a music industry that exists hand in hand with a
technology mediated society (Leon and Wright 51). Accordingly, this study strives to achieve these goals by answering the following research questions:
1.How do live music channels such as YouTube construct liveness as a form of authenticity? 2. In what ways does the visual curation of YouTube channels such as ‘COLORS’ and ‘La Blogothèque’ tailor the reception of an artist?
In order to situate the larger framework of digital platforms within the concepts discussed above, this study follows an observational research style. First, I will highlight previous literature and theory that has made important contributions to the fields of
authenticity and liveness. This will comprise of concepts such as liveness in a digital context, YouTube’s participatory culture, relational labour, popular music and authenticity, and YouTube’s role in mediating the affective experience.
The second part of this study will comprise of a content analysis that will focus on the following YouTube live music channels: ‘COLORS’ (3,366, 302 subscribers) and ‘La
Blogothèque’ (522, 407 subscribers). Selected for their unique concepts and aesthetic
approach to content curation, ten videos with the highest number of views from each channel will be studied. They will be critiqued on observations such as camera angles, body gestures, aesthetic curation, the staging of spontaneity and the curation of intimacy. Moreover, by investigating elements of audio design, certain processes will be highlighted which are integral in shaping the authenticity of a viewing experience. In order to determine the collective impact of each of these elements on the virtual audience, this research will also analyse the comments section (both directed to the artist as well as between users). Lastly,
likes and dislikes will also be noted in order to illustrate the participation and interaction of YouTube’s audience.
1.5 Thesis Structure
The present introductory chapter provides a background to this study, as well as devising the focus and rationale of investigating the chosen phenomena. Following this, the second chapter, ‘Mapping the evolution of Music Commodities: From the Phonograph to Streaming’, will map the evolution of music commodities in order to illustrate the various ways in which liveness and technology have adapted to the demands of the time, in addition to providing vital insight regarding YouTube’s role in shaping authentic experiences. In this manner, readers will be provided with strong contextualization to the current research objectives. After having laid down the foundation for investigation, chapter three, ‘Theoretical Framework’ will undertake a more detailed presentation of certain overarching concepts regarding authenticity and liveness by placing them within a framework of key theories such as the ushering in of sound technology, relational labour, neo-liberalization and YouTube’s role in value creation. The methodological approach for the present thesis will then be
described in chapter four, ‘Methodology’, highlighting reasons for the selection of live music channels COLORS and La Blogothèque and the procedure of data analysis.
The fifth chapter, ‘Findings and Discussion’ will demonstrate the previously discussed literary excerpts and theoretical concepts in action; through its findings and discussion section. This chapter will be crucial is presenting certain key components that will depict significant components in liveness’s curation and how this contributes to an experience. It will talk about the elements of visual mediation, aesthetic curation and audio design. Lastly, it will situate these findings within the larger research question through the comments section of YouTube users themselves. The sixth and final chapter serves to conclude this study and present its limitations and consequent proposals for further research.
Each chapter of this study has been designed to address various aspects of the research question with the intention of contributing to the overall research at hand. By focusing on the paradoxical reality of ‘mediatized liveness’ within the larger fabric of the music industry, it is hoped to provide contemporary audiences with an intricate sense of what shapes an authentic viewing experience. In doing so, this research hopes to instigate awareness to a new
generation of music fans who are often blind to the degree of external influence imposed on them. Through pertinent arguments combined with critical findings –this study strives to
generate broader questions in a niche field which is in need for further research and investigation.
The following section will now proceed to trace the origins and evolution of music commodities in order to demonstrate the technological and societal impact of previous eras on live music. By doing so, this study will illustrate that reinvention in music is inevitable, with the demands and desires of a time period having a vital say in the way music is
repackaged and distributed for public consumption. It is worth pointing out that by examining music’s constant adaptation over the course of previous decades, significant insight will be generated into the emergence of contemporary music practices and the profound sociological impact it has subsequently created.
2.0. Mapping the evolution of Music Commodities: From the Phonograph to Streaming “Live music lasts only as long as the performance, for that short time when one hears the music, and after that it is just a memory. The noun ‘record’ is therefore an appropriate term for the product of the recording industry. It is not just a consumer product, but an artefact of a time gone by”
— Andre Millard, America on Record 8,9
Turning to history is immensely beneficial when analysing a social phenomenon. Not only do historical perspectives shed light on processes that have often been overlooked in contributing to music’s current uninhibited access, but they also highlight instances that continue to affect the evolution of music’s liveness and authenticity. As an art form, live music especially, is a social phenomenon and has been greatly affected by practices and cultural preferences grounded in the past (Tunedly n. pag.). Moreover, the current landscape of liveness has not emerged instantaneously, but is instead a culmination of various actors, performers, resources and technology interacting over extended periods of time. Therefore, by mapping the evolution of music commodities, this section hopes to generate important questions regarding the latest chapter in the way live music is packaged and delivered to contemporary audiences – YouTube.
Before live music was ever able to be preserved and captured in time, music underwent periods of invention, re-invention and evolution. The journey through which recorded music made its way to our screens began a little more than a 100 years ago. In his book America on Record: A History of Recorded Sounds, Andre Millard writes that the novelty that came with hearing a recording of one’s own voice was invented in 1877 by means of Thomas Edison’s phonograph (Millard 1). It was this invention that was a true landmark in modern technology and ushered in the era of recorded sound technology (Millard 1). Interestingly, while the phonograph was crucial in enabling the accessibility and ease of modern music listening, certain academics have had contrasting views.
Peter Tschmuck in his book Creativity and Innovation in the Music Industry states that it was not the phonograph but rather the beginning of the commercial use and mass distribution of records that truly ‘industrialized’ music (Tschmuck 9). He mentions that when concert promoters would have successful music performances, music publishers would distribute such performances through adapted sheet music for various instruments (Tschmuck 9). It is interesting to note, Piano music, specifically operatic excerpts, dances and songs
formed the most profitable area of music publishing; and it was because of this that in the early 1800s, Vienna became a valuable centre for engraved music by means of composers such as Mozart and Haydn (Scott 24, 28). It was through this that music publishers came to play the role of gatekeepers, determining the type and form of music that would reach the public (Tschmuck 9). The gatekeepers that Tschmuck was referring to in the 18th century still thrive today, however, under a different guise. Moreover, the reproduction of a performance through sheet music is particularly compelling as it highlights early instances of reproducing or recording music, by making the live format accessible to the public after it had been performed. With the anonymous veil of the digital, combined with the plethora of channels through which music can be distributed today, the modern-day gatekeeper remains invisible to listeners, while listeners remain visible to them.
2.1. Music has a marketplace
From the period between 1890 and 1945, the phonograph became central to the rise and decline of the record business and key social patterns in the United States (Kenney xii). Phonograph trade journals reflected the importance of New York City as a key player in music trades, values and goals as well as having a say in the companies that dominated distribution and records (Kenney xii). This market-like structure that Kenney touches upon could provide the first instances of music commodities as they exist today. Furthermore, while today’s markets are more fluid and less physical in terms of trade, it nonetheless functions through a well-defined network and hierarchy of professionals that have a large say in determining what is consumed and where.
It is worth noting that in the period between 1902 and 1910, the industry that was built around the phonograph became global, with American and European companies expanding their businesses to remote locations (Tschmuck 27). Sound engineers would be sent to regions such as Central Asia, North Africa and Central America in order to locally record the music of these countries, reproduce and re-import them back into the country of origin (Tschmuck 27). A fitting example of this is that on the eve of the First World War, the Gramophone Company set up ‘training centres’ in India to turn out popular recording artists by setting poems to music for them to sing, or engaging musicians to teach them.
Consequently, two to three thousand new songs were created every year. In the 1940s, these songs were to have a strong influence on Indian film musicals and lasted until the coming of the cassette (Chanan 15, 16). It is worth pointing out that while the recording technology in
the early 1900s was nowhere as advanced as the equipment that the following century would soon provide, these early years were vital in the adaptation of the live format to the recorded. Furthermore, the reproduction of music designed by sound engineers points towards one of the vital steps that will be discussed later in this research in the context of YouTube – the manipulation of recorded sound.
2.2. Breakthroughs and World War II
With World War II, came the ushering in of background music. Its significant contribution to raising morale and decreasing fatigue enabled it to be it to be a prominent contributor to productivity, with an estimated increase in output by 25% (Millard 4). This revelation of music’s subliminal use on the masses was to have a profound impact on the history of recorded music. In the short term, it brought music into the office and factories; while in the long run it led to the complete restructuring of the sonic environment in America, leading to the prevalence of ‘canned music2’ in all aspects of life (Millard 4). During the 1930s, swing became the more popular of the canned genres, played by bands led by artists such as Jimmy Lunceford, Duke Ellington and Cab Calloway (Moore n. pag.). It is also worth noting that during the initial days of television, the term ‘canned music’ came to be used in place of recorded music; even replaced for live sound while artists performed their music. From this a new technique known as ‘lip synching’ grew (Sweetwater n. pag.). The existence of lip synching from the early days of the television points towards the first instances of ‘mediatizing’ liveness – processes by which everyday practices are increasingly shaped by mediating technology and media organizations (Livingstone 3).
Additionally, such evidence also indicates that professionals at the top of industry’s hierarchy had discovered that by contributing to morale, music as a commodity could do more than just entertain. The extreme profitability that ensued from these discoveries could also explain record sales doubling from 1945-1946 with an increase of $109 million to $218 million generated in revenue; in 1947 this figure came to $224 million (Tschmuck 101). Moreover, to a large extent, it was also during this period that broadcasters and record companies realized that the value of music (in terms of both quality and monetary investment), remains grounded in its live experience (Frith 4). After the war, the record
2 Canned Music – A term that stemmed from 1877 (the year that the phonograph was invented), which played back sound from a rotating cylinder. When these cylinders were packaged and made available to the public, the medium was dubbed as “canned music” by consumers. Sweetwater Sound
industry had not greatly changed in structure and shellac records3 were still produced at 78 rotations per minute (rpm) with the capacity to only hold 4 minutes of music (Tschmuck 101). A solution to this was the ‘vinyl’ – a material less fragile and more malleable.
The vinyl record’s sound was as good as the shellac and could store 20 minutes of music per side (Tschmuck 102). The evolution of the shellac to the vinyl is proof that technology within the music industry was evolving quickly; it was truly a business. Today, this 130-year-old format refuses to die, and even accounted for 5% of album sales in the UK in 2016 (Murphy n. pag.). As the same author continues, for those who can’t afford
advertising, vinyl has become “the sharp end of the cutting edge” – a central showpiece or event from which digital success will hopefully snowball (Murphy n. pag.). Clearly as a product, the vinyl was responsible for creating an experience, one which much of live music’s digital format centres around today – with YouTube playing a principal role in its delivery and reception.
2.3. Breaking boundaries
In the 1970s, there was rarely a living room in Europe or the United States that did not have a ‘home’ stereo of a record player, amplifier, tape recorder and radio (Millard 2). From this it was clear that as a form of entertainment, the demand for music was strong and had the ability to be transmitted through several different vehicles. It was also during the period between the early 1970s and early 2000s that music took the form of the compact tape cassette - and rose to quick popularity with its easy handling and size, even adopted in nations of Asia and Africa (Millard 2). It is worth keeping in mind, that while the present musical landscape remains unperturbed by geographical barriers with music largely existing in electronic form, the demand for music to be accessible across oceans began decades earlier. In 1981, Philips and Sony collaborated to introduce the ‘CD’ or compact disc – that ushered in the most widely used digital format; as CDs were smaller and lighter than records, they had the advantage of being economically effective for companies that already had a control and wide reach of the business (El Gamal 10).
While the physical nature of music products was very much a lucrative business in the years leading into the 1980s, no one predicted what years later would be a revolutionary landmark in the landscape of music and imperative to the present research paper – the
3Shellac Records – Any flat disc playing a speed of 78 revolutions per minute is called a 78 by collectors. The materials
Internet. The mid-1990s witnessed the Internet growing significantly, with computers gaining popularity in homes, and subsequently a new format called the MP3 was introduced. It compressed audio files into easily transferrable sizes to fit on personal computers (El Gamal 10). However, as technological changes continued at an unprecedented rate, the internet’s impact expanded beyond illegal download to including greatly different ways in which to promote, distribute and market music (Aspray 451, 453). This gave rise to a structured system and method for music to be stored, transmitted and played electronically and unknowingly created the foundation for an electronic medium to deliver far more diverse forms of entertaining content. One of which includes live music channels.
With the onset of the 21st century, and particularly as the dot-com boom began, multiple attempts were made to create internet-based music companies. In addition, record labels initiated minimal and cautious experimentation into the distribution and promotion of music projects via the internet (El Gamal 14). Nevertheless, the most significant development in the era of music commodities arrived with the ushering in of peer-to-peer (P2P) file
sharing technology as introduced by Napster (El Gamal 14). Through advanced production and recording, aspiring artists now had the ability to create high-quality music from anywhere – there was no more a need for musicians to go into a professional studio or require a label to help finance them, this could be largely pertained to the open and free nature of the internet’s communication and rise of social media, both of which have played an integral role in the formation of platforms such as YouTube. It was these two areas from which record companies drew their power (El Gamal 22).
Peer-to-peer file sharing services such as Limewire and Napster not only implied a loss of record sales, but also led to a complete restructuring of music’s distribution combined with a rising popularity of concerts (El Gamal 3). While the legal distribution that followed a few years later enabled the ‘streaming style’ of music commodities to flourish (we see this on popular contemporary platforms such as Spotify, iTunes, Soundcloud and Tidal), more than a decade later, music has not only changed the way in which it is transmitted but also its
shaping of content – integrating the record with live sound. This has not only led to the re-orientation and disruption of older media industries but to a re-organization of music
practices, most strongly embodied in the field of liveness. Most importantly, where platforms have most impacted music commodities is through their participatory character. This is manifested in various ways; specifically sharing, participation and intimacy have become critical areas of deliberation when investigating contemporary liveness (Kennedy 20).
The streaming of music through digital distribution models as has been demonstrated, governs the music industry today and can be viewed as the latest phase in music
commodities. It extends the usual capabilities associated with mass media; rather than having music ‘imposed’ on them, today’s audience can select their music, manage playlists and share content instantaneously (Nguyen et. al 2). YouTube flourishes in this regard, viewed as the most popular option in the world when it comes to streamed music (McIntyre n. pag.). By means of its heavily participatory nature – it provides a world of opportunity for the constant re-interpretation of liveness and authenticity by positioning its audience members as
programmers as much as spectators.
As depicted in the section above, the delivery and reception of music is subject to various innovations in technology while simultaneously situating itself within the demands and norms of society. By analysing the evolution of music commodities from the phonograph to the era of streaming, this summary highlights the way in which recording technology has constantly been subject to innovation; with each time period proving to be pivotal in shaping current interpretations of liveness and authentic content. Moreover, the proliferation of Web 2.0 has not only blurred the lines between traditional and virtual representations of liveness, but in doing so has made current and future consumption patterns challenging to identify. With this notion in mind, the following section will shed light on the contemporary landscape of live content and its curation on the digital platforms of today.
2.4. The Contemporary Landscape of Live Music
Innovation in music takes place through an interaction of numerous circumstances and actors combined with the demands of the time. The present landscape is no different. The music industry, just like new media technology, is never stagnant and continues to evolve at an unprecedented rate with an array of mediators, editors and producers determining what constitutes our understanding of liveness. Through this process – not only have the structural aspects of music’s mediums been redefined but so has our understanding of what constitutes those mediums. We believe a virtual performance to be ‘unplugged’ or ‘live’ simply by the inclusion of such terms in the title of a video. Digital platforms such as YouTube have only exacerbated this, through their highly visual interface that allows camera work to mimic the eye so seamlessly that we forget we forget about the screen altogether. The heavily visual emphasis placed on liveness today is a key factor in forming perceptions of authenticity which will be looked at in detail through the analysis on live music channels.
In addition, YouTube’s profound sociability and participatory culture allows for an affective experience like never before – one where live performance that is raw and ‘authentic’ can be discussed amongst like-minded individuals and accepted or rejected for their authenticity accordingly. Many theories have been put forth to uncover the
ever-changing nature of what constitutes concepts such as ‘liveness’ and ‘authenticity’ within the context of music. The extensive academic work that has been conducted by scholars such as Peggy Phelan (1993), Philip Auslander (1999) and Simon Frith (2007) demonstrate that the interpretation of liveness is far more complex that what meets the eye, and can be applied to numerous disciplines ranging from Psychology to Information Technology. While these concepts have been individually studied and applied to varied academic fields, the present research aims to study their interaction collectively.
2.5. Staging Liveness: Liveness in a digital context
In the process of adapting itself to the technological and social constructs of the
digital, the lines between traditional and virtual representations of liveness have been blurred. In his book Liveness in Modern Music: Musicians, Technology and the Perception of
Performance, Paul Sanden refers to the fact that when in the past ‘traditional liveness’ meant
that a musical performance was to be experienced in person rather than on record, the present state of performance cannot be categorized into binaries such as live/recorded due to the fluidity with which it adapts to many other musical contexts. The most common of which includes televised liveness, the circulation of a performance long after its initial delivery and a heavy dependence on pre-recorded material. He explains that it is “between these poles, in which liveness plays an important defining role” (Sanden 3). This modern day ‘ambiguity’ described by Sanden could be a preliminary driver in enhancing the accessibility and fluidity of liveness. In other words, as there is no common consensus on what shapes ‘contemporary liveness’ – it becomes easy for social and technological constructions of liveness to prevail. This in turns creates the basis for what I will now explain as ‘mediatized liveness’.
According to Philip Auslander, ‘mediatization’ is a term employed to indicate when a particular cultural object is a product of mass media or media technology (Auslander 4). To this end, he describes ‘mediatized performance’ as “performance that is circulated on television, as audio or video recordings, and in other forms based in technologies of
reproduction” (Auslander 4). As demonstrated, the ambiguity of contemporary liveness that has originated from the digital era has allowed for various interpretations of what modern
audiences understand as ‘live’. Significantly, it has also come to be responsible for certain structural changes. A possible explanation for the inclusion of mediatization into a plethora of live performance can be attributed to the fact that live events are either being created to be reproduced or to become identical with those that are mediatized (Auslander 35). As Auslander succinctly sums this up, “live performance incorporates mediatization to the degree that the live event is a product of media technologies” (25). He then provides the example of electric amplification in order to illustrate this. He writes that as soon as electric amplification is incorporated in a performance, the event is mediatized. We do not hear the acoustic (live) event, but rather the technological reproduction of a sound picked up by a microphone or the vibration of a speaker (Auslander 25). What this illustrates is that in the process of constantly adapting and reinventing itself based on present technologies, liveness has subsequently come to replicate that which is mediatized. It is this seamless integration between the traditional live format and the mediatized that creates the perfect illusion for virtual audiences under which mediators of live content thrive. Nevertheless, while such structural changes do indeed serve as vital enablers of live curation, the shift from ‘live’ content to raw, intimate or ‘authentic’ content is strongly due to the personalization of music technology.
The personalization of liveness is integral for generating associations of authenticity within a performance. Live music channels on YouTube are laden with terms describing their channels as ‘unique’ ‘intimate’ and ‘beautiful’ – promising users a constant stream of live music from the very best artists. From such descriptions, channels work towards building a relationship with the audience, the way in which recording technology has always strived. This is clarified by Frith, who explains that the documentation of recording technology on the public and private uses of music have demonstrated that while job opportunities for live musicians have declined, a simultaneous shift has occurred whereby music activity has been increasingly domesticated (Frith 2). This implies that as time listening to music at home has increased (i.e. on record, television and the radio), time spent going to hear live performances in public halls and bar rooms has decreased. This culminated in the ‘domestic’ use of music becoming greatly personalized: transforming music listening according to the wants, needs and music preferences of the individual. Family entertainment moved from the radiogram to the bedroom transistor and from the piano to the phonograph. Frith’s findings explain that digital platforms have the perfect advantage by fulfilling both aspects of accessibility and personalization, with YouTube as a frontrunner in this regard.
Still, while the video-sharing nature of YouTube allows for a higher emphasis on the visual from the ‘audio-visual’, the audio component is still actively processed and
scrutinized. In their research on ‘Factors Influencing Pop Music Preferences for Young People’, Boyle, Hosterman and Ramsey examined self-reports by students regarding their music preferences. The results from the study revealed that characteristics such as mood, melody, rhythm, lyrics, harmony and danceability of the songs played by the researchers were the most crucial factors for preference by students – with formal elements of music viewed as generally more important than sociocultural (Boyle and Hosterman 54, 55). The authors cite LeBlanc, who outlines some of these factors as being related to the stimulus itself (physical properties, performance quality, complexity and referential meaning) and cultural effects (media, family, peer group and incidental conditioning) (Boyle and Hosterman 48). If music preference is indeed based on what Boyle and Hosterman describe, then YouTube is placed in a favourable position by streamlining the formal elements of music and cultural effects through its visually interactive and stimulating platform.
2.6. YouTube and Participation: Critical Findings from the Field of Platform Studies
While the arguments put forth in the sections above demonstrate the re-framing of liveness and authenticity as a result of social and technological developments, this study chose to examine liveness through the lens of YouTube due to its inherent participatory culture which is essential in the way liveness is consumed today. YouTube’s participatory culture is its ‘core business’ and the cultural logics of openness, community and authenticity are embedded in the YouTube platform at all scales of commerciality – from videos
documenting everyday actions to those documenting YouTube stars with millions of subscribers, and sometimes an amalgamation of both (Burgess and Green 1). Nevertheless, this study asks – what is it about YouTube compared to other platforms that has enabled it to be the hotbed of live content that it is today? Media theorist Henry Jenkins provides some clarity. According to Jenkins, ‘interactivity’ refers to technologies designed to personalize user experiences (as in an app) or to enable meaningful choices (as in a game) (Jenkins 13). In contrast, ‘participation’ refers to a culture’s properties whereby groups individually and collectively make decisions that impact their shared experiences (Jenkins 13). We participate
in something; but we interact with something (Jenkins 13). Nevertheless, there is an overlap
between the two – clicking a button on a social media site may enable a user’s interactivity by design of the interface; however, in doing so they also participate within the community (Jenkins 13). YouTube’s significant contribution to liveness can largely be attributed to this
aspect - the platform embodying a middle ground between both interaction and participation. It is also worth noting that one of the most fundamental outcomes from YouTube’s
participatory culture is the careful crafting and curation of live content – content that allows media producers to profit off participation while we remain blind to the culture we are creating (Jenkins 2). This will be discussed in further detail during the theoretical portion of this study.
In addition to the choice-facilitating nature of the interface, YouTube’s prominent role in contributing to the popular culture that moulds liveness stems from its fan engagement by means of features such as liking and commenting on content. In addition, the popularity of live content on YouTube is determined by a range of different measures such as most viewed and most discussed. Liveness therefore is not a representation of reality but rather a result of technologies of re-presentation (Burgess and Green 39, 41). It is because of this that
YouTube stands out from other forms of recording technology by nature of its fluidity. Clement Chau’s article on ‘YouTube as participatory culture’ provides some perspective on this. In it, he emphasizes that the ever-growing youth subscription to YouTube can be pertained to features that provide opportunities to collaborate, connect, create and circulate original media content (Chau 72). He goes on to mention that the youth are especially attracted to the platform, as barriers for participation are low and the platform’s instructions and informal mentorship facilitate their developing ideas. Compared to more relationship-oriented platforms such as Facebook, where YouTube stands out is in its fundamentally video-based content combined with interactive features that allow for user interaction and participation of an unparalleled scale, much along the lines of what Henry Jenkins explains. Each of these factors culminate in the video’s every element to be the topic of focus, with surrounding discussion only strengthening the reception and perception of what was just watched. Perceptions which are heavily steered by the authenticity of the live content.
YouTube’s participatory culture is pivotal in determining what makes live content authentic. Such creative practice has become widely adopted due to the ubiquity of digital technologies. Through this, young people have not only learnt new media competencies through their participation on YouTube, but in this way have also learnt to be more ‘critical’ of media messages. (Burgess and Green 70, 71). The current generation of YouTube users no longer discuss a performance with a reactionary ‘this was great!’ but imbibe a commenting style such as user ‘nohedz’ who on an NPR tiny desk concert of pop artist ‘Khalid’ writes “This is quality music. The fact that all the music presented here are just his first songs
written baffles me. He’s so young, with so much potential, not mentioning his voice has that something that just melts all your problems, I believe is called soul”. In this way, authentic experiences in live performances no longer stem from solely the originator of the
performance but is additionally shaped by discussion situated within YouTube’s participatory environment.
However, as with all networked environments, YouTube entails certain loopholes that accelerate the process of liveness’s re-packaging by means of changing participatory roles. One of the main ways in which this occurs according to Dynel, is that users can be
categorized into passive or active users depending on their usage of the website’s
communicative tools (39). However, such a differentiation could be misleading as it does not take into consideration the changing participatory roles; the participatory statuses of
YouTube users develop with their interaction over time (Dynel 39). This can be explained by the fact that an individual at the reception end may “take the floor” by contributing a video or a comment. However, computer mediated interaction enables “passive” participants, who do not post comments and videos or contribute to interactive activity despite being entitled to. Therefore, their participation can scarcely be detected (Dynel 39). In this way, while the online participation with live content may be more effective with a stronger ‘virtual
audience’; there may very well be a separate audience who are more inclined to take on the role of a ‘traditional audience’. The ambiguity that this presents allows for users, both active and passive, to constantly re-determine what is defined as ‘popular’ or ‘authentic’, without necessarily being aware of doing so. This is a defining factor when it comes to YouTube’s role in the re-organisation of liveness.
In addition to this, Dynel also explains that the participation of YouTube users is more complex than that of television viewers, who still are involved as recipients of media and are rarely involved in its co-construction (Dynel 49). She explains that YouTubers engage in irregular computer-mediated interaction, with their participatory statuses changing at the production and reception ends. In terms of the reception aspect, Dynel conceptualizes YouTubers as 1. (un)ratified listeners and hearers in videos, 2. recipients who watch videos and 3. addressees and third parties who read other’s commentaries (Dynel 49, 50). With relation to production, YouTubers are active through 1. taking the floor as speakers, 2. authoring videos as senders and 3. commenting and replying to earlier posts (Dynel 50).
From the findings illustrated above, YouTube’s participatory framework is integral in the de-stabilization of traditional liveness to the shaping of liveness as it presently exists. By
enabling its users to function as both producers and consumers or in other words, ‘prosumers’ (Ritzer 61), the platform allows both liveness and authenticity to transcend its previously passive connotations to extremely active socially constructed phenomenon. Most
significantly, while YouTube users may remain unaware about the degree and impact of their participation, each decision carried out on the platform enables liveness to be subject to re-interpretation in ways that previous recording technology has never been able to. Findings such as these indicate that viewing experiences are no longer constructed by a handful of producers and editors alone; the success with which they operate are determined by an active mass audience who play a significant role in determining the type and success of live content on YouTube, and while they may be unaware about the critical nature of their role – they continue to make up a virtual community that has the final say from production to the end product. Nevertheless, while such arguments are crucial indicators regarding the nature of liveness, what can they tell us about authenticity?
2.7. Popular Music and Authenticity
Historically, perceptions of a music performance as ‘authentic’ have never been fixed and have instead constantly been subject to continued negotiation. The process of ‘mutual agreement’ between the audience and the artist has been accelerated with the advent of new media technology which has in turn been instrumental in negotiating authentic content. Previously, authenticity was determined by maintaining a sense of cohesion and identity through shared language, demeanour, clothing and age; but with the current landscape of internet-based chat-groups and list-serves dedicated to specific music, users have the ability to contribute their opinion regarding a performance’s legitimacy without having any of these characteristics (Peterson 1089). Therefore, where once authenticity was determined by face-to-face interaction, today it is determined by discussion facilitated by YouTube’s
participatory culture. As Auslander fittingly explains (when talking about rock music) – “the effect of authenticity in rock is a matter of culturally determined convention, not an
expression of essence” (Auslander 82).
There is no doubt that the large-scale cinematic technologies of today have played a mammoth role in shaping the ‘experience’ of authenticity while simultaneously delivering it through a multitude of perspectives. Jamie Sexton explains that the infiltration of audio-visual technologies has produced mixed effects which either extend and accelerate, or
107). If we frame this within YouTube’s context, Sexton’s statements can be observed from the virtual audience’s reaction to a pop music performance on the platform - with YouTube users often commenting on the sincerity, expressiveness and ‘raw talent’ of the artist based on the audio-visual alone. Sexton further explains that inter-mediating technologies can produce fluid and flexible perspectives of live performance through interactions of large-scale telematic images structured within cinematography; which further contributes to the presence of the performer perceived by the naked eye (Sexton 118). To a large extent, this is how YouTube defines live performance, by ‘staging’ common notions of liveness so
seamlessly that we perceive it to be authentic.
While the role of technology is vital in presenting live content as independent of external influence, the way in which it is processed by the viewer is just as pertinent. The assessment of authenticity, when individually applied, is based on a congruence between how one sees themselves and how they are viewed by others (Harrison 1785). Moreover, he also cites Peterson (2005) who explains that authenticity does not comprise of an organic quality that naturally occurs in things but is rather ‘a claim that is made’ which is ‘either accepted or rejected’ (Peterson 1086). In this regard authenticity manages to strike agreement between someone or something being presented as authentic and the acceptance or rejection of the presentation (Harrison 1785). Where YouTube flourishes in this regard is that it is at its very core, social. It is intrinsically designed for user participation and engagement surrounding visual content. Moreover, the way in which the platform is designed to generate discussion around content makes it almost natural to strike an agreement about what is presented as authentic without necessarily being aware of doing so. This is a prominent factor to take into consideration when adapting notions of authenticity to the digital.
2.8. YouTube and Technology
As the sections above demonstrate, contemporary notions of authenticity and liveness are defined by artist-audience negotiation facilitated through the social processes of a
platform. While it has thus far been determined that such sociality is an essential ingredient in the re-structuring of music consumption today, there is another vital component which has been integral in determining the current trends associated with performance and recording – technology; and this can be explained by a change in the production literacy of musicians and a simultaneous move towards more technologically intensive performances, either on stage or off stage (Knowles and Hewitt 1).
This inclination towards technology-mediated performance is largely responsible in the amalgamation of production and performance practices between the studio and the live performance respectively (Knowles and Hewitt 16). As the scholar Andrew Kania writes “More and more equipment is making the move from the recording studio to the stage as its size decreases and its flexibility increases. Perhaps one day all that is achievable in the studio will be achievable onstage. At that point there will be no reason to withhold the label ‘studio performance’ from ‘live’ rock concerts” (Kania 5). More importantly, where technology contributes the most towards contemporary liveness is in providing evidence of skill in the performance – not just the manipulation of interfaces but a demonstration of recorded sounds that can be ‘reproduced’ in a live context. This combination of proof of skill (i.e. the audience witnessing the physical manipulation of sound) and performative agency (i.e. where
sophisticated production technologies are deployed) subsequently contributes to the authentication of the performance (Knowles and Hewitt 16,17).
YouTube masterfully uses this agency to its advantage in the delivery of liveness – by transforming the sound recording from a physical object to digital content and consequently creating new cross-over genres of the live format (Holt 246). Two such examples of these include the new ‘concert film’ format seen by the 2018 Taylor Swift Reputation Stadium Tour (Sheffield n. pag.) and Beyoncé’s ‘Homecoming’ documentary and live album based on her headlining Coachella performance in 2018 (Spanos n.pag.), both produced by Netflix. Both films engage with the contemporary audience; partly by means of the cultural
innovation that platforms provide in different fields of popular music production (Holt 251). This innovation is supported by the New York Times who says about Beyoncé’s
‘Homecoming’ documentary – “At almost 140 minutes, the majority of ‘Homecoming’ is what many viewers have already seen (and, perhaps, seen again and again) this time through a greater variety of angles and Instagram-like filters” (Harris n. pag). The article then goes on argue that, “The performances from the first and second weekends (denoted by the differing colour schemes and costume choices) are seamlessly intercut; this technique is particularly effective early on, when the performer’s outfits shift from yellow (Weekend 1) and all-pink (Weekend 2)” (Harris n. pag.). These observations illustrate innovation by means of re-constructing live performances through state-of-the-art editing technology, voice-overs and camera technique. This illustrates the fragmented nature of liveness which is technology’s most profound contribution to the authentic experience by means of re-constructing content to appear immediate. Moreover, the article goes on to mention that the ‘intimate’ and ‘candid’
moments touted by Netflix are comparatively brief, appearing between long, uninterrupted musical segments from the show (see fig. 1). These moments will be enough to satisfy the overzealous Beyhive (referring to Beyoncé’s loyal fans and followers) and probably more casual fans and admirers, too” (Harris n. pag.). Ultimately, this illustrates that by means of activating immediate associations of ‘authenticity’ characterized by the inclusion of brief intimate moments, streaming platforms have capitalized on the fluidity of liveness through mediatized performance.
Figure 1: Brief, intimate moment: Beyoncé points her sceptre to camera
The fascination of digital natives with liveness, can be witnessed by the numerous documentary-style concerts offered on streaming-giants such as Netflix, investing
big-budgets for even bigger ratings. This is perhaps one of the most significant occurrences in the era of modern liveness; as movie ticket prices continue to rise and platforms strike bigger deals with distributors, laptops are quickly transforming into the modern movie theatre
(Pigeons and Planes n. pag.). With YouTube described as one of the internet’s most
observed and used media (Grünewald & Haupt 1), the platform’s technological contribution to all other streaming mediums is a vital component to shaping liveness.
In a world where technological mediation has re-determined the way in which we experience most art forms, music has been transformed the most. Since the dominance of the internet has enabled the divide between the virtual and reality to become increasingly blurry, it is the focus of this research to shed light and generate awareness on modern consumption patterns of liveness within the media. In doing so, the study hopes to explore whether what we experience as ‘authentic’ is truly authentic at all.
3.0. Theoretical Framework 3.1. Curating the live
“Because live performance is the category of cultural production most directly affected by the dominance of media, it is particularly urgent to address the situation of live performance in our mediatized culture”.
— Philip Auslander - Liveness: Performance in a Mediatized Culture 2
As discussed in the previous section, liveness is no longer a simple system of processes through which musical works are delivered. The contemporary landscape of live performance is greatly influenced by a sophisticated interaction between technology and art form; and it is this new ‘televisual’ medium of liveness that has become an establishing element of cultural formation (Auslander 2). As technological developments move well beyond their originally intended use, live and mediatized forms of entertainment compete for audience attention; with mediatized forms gaining an advantage (Auslander 6). This advantage largely stems from a collective effort of technological reproduction (sound recording), the interactivity of platforms and innovative marketing efforts that attracts the modern user with engaging content in order to capitalize off their attention.
Moreover, mediatized forms of liveness threaten music’s traditional performance paradigms (Sanden 20). It does this through the merging of opposite music tendencies (for example: instrumental music and electronic sounds), creating a ‘no-man’s-land’ within the larger landscape of liveness. This is enabled by means of reasserting bodily presence in performance while simultaneously purging such presence in favour of disembodied sound production (Croft 60). As a result, traditional live music does not have to compete with mediated music separately but has instead come to be merged with recorded music to evolve into a more complex music market with an inherent duality (Frith 4). Taking these factors into consideration, I will now proceed to discuss certain key concepts of what live music looks like in the terrain of new media.
The first argument that finds relevance when discussing the way live music is
constructed for viewer consumption is that of camera positioning. Auslander explains that the way in which the multi-camera set-up facilitates a television director to replicate a spectator’s wandering eye, provides a viewer with proximity to an event (Auslander 19). In the context of live music videos on YouTube, this holds true. YouTube functions visually just like a television and determines the points of focus for an audience member, despite claiming to be
completely ‘live’ in its approach. It could also be worth exploring whether this effect is amplified as computer consumption is a more private rather than public activity; and hence one is more easily absorbed into the content. While some live music channels do indeed engage in this construed approach of live performance to a lesser degree than others, it is worth noting that even one-take videos make conscious decisions while placing their artist within a frame. But who oversees such decisions? And how are these roles created?
Presently, the construction of liveness is determined by a multitude of mediators or ‘middlemen’ who are greatly protective of their roles as editors, producers, sound designers and camera people (Mulligan). To a large extent, these middlemen are the essential cogs in the larger machine of the music industry and govern the many social processes that lie beneath what is finally delivered as a live performance. In the more traditional context of the music industry, one might have referred to them as ticket sellers, concert producers or label executives. Today, with the complexity of music commodities on streaming platforms combined with the fluidity of technology, their roles are harder to identify. As a result, so is the influence exerted by them. Significantly, the largely technological fabric of liveness is playing a monumental role in enabling this. Music is a marketplace, and like any marketplace certain systems and processes are put in place in order to achieve profitability.
Drawing from sociocultural theory, Davis provides some perspective on the perspective of mediators. She explains that the idea of what a subject (or in this case mediators) may want to achieve, may be held internally within their mind, however, the realisation of these ideas depends on interaction with various ‘tools’ (Davis 504). These tools can range from culturally learned process, language and even physical tools such as
technology (Davis 504). As a site that possesses each of these tools, YouTube makes it profoundly easy for these middlemen to benefit of the features of the platform in order to carefully craft liveness to achieve a particular outcome – audience engagement. Nonetheless, in addition to the greatly assistive nature of tools, the prevalence of middlemen under the guise of the digital also largely stems from the layout of the music industry as a whole.
George Yudice (2003) states that artistic expressions such as music serve as agents of varied economic development rather than being appreciated for their intrinsic aestheticism; consequently, the music industry is transformed into a site where multiple parties (artists, agencies, audiences and developers) compete with each other for more effective management and control, consequently creating strategies that challenge the current economic and social
order (Leon 131). This is done by making live concerts free to consume, instantly accessible to viewers, aesthetically pleasing and breaking the barriers of communication that previously existed between artist and audience. This demonstrates that while live music channels are presented to appear as ‘undisturbed’ as possible, content is still a product that is effectively
managed to be shaped into another profitable opportunity. Moreover, with YouTube’s free
business model, the expansion of digital media leads to neoliberal behaviour defined by supporting increased participation through consumption (Leon 129), an aspect that the platform has mastered.
3.2. Intimacy, Spontaneity, Relational Labour and Immediacy
“The experience itself was characterized by an immediate pleasure, an instantaneously received delight, which ruled out any mediating act of judgement”
— Susan Davis: Liveness, mediation and immediacy – innovative technology use in process and performance 505
Liveness in music possesses a characteristic that allows it to significantly surpass other forms of music consumption – its intimacy. Intimacy in this regard can be defined as an intensified feeling of warmth, a form of sociality which engenders a sense of togetherness despite material, economic and social factors that may indicate otherwise (Garcia 2). Other scholars have also built on this sense of feeling, by describing intimacy as a combination of concepts relating to what is heard, to the perception of the space around the performance and naturally to the performance itself (Hyde 1). While stadium tours and concert halls have proven this perception of intimacy to be true, streaming platforms have elevated this
experience through the video format of the same. Philip Auslander argues that even the most intimate pieces, whereby the viewer is a few feet away from the artist, is still presented with the opportunity for even greater intimacy through close-up monitors (Auslander 39). He states that ironically, in the context of television, immediacy and intimacy were the same qualities that allowed it to displace live performance (Auslander 35, 36). Live performances on YouTube are embodiments of such statements, with most channels designing their camera work around close-up shots that are so intimate they almost seem intrusive to the artist’s personal space. An example of this can be seen in Netflix’s film, ‘Homecoming: A Film by Beyoncé, in which this intimacy can be clearly seen (see fig. 2). Set design and production can strategically shape lighting, the number of audience members and the spatiality of a
venue, thereby creating the perfect recipe to make the virtual audience wish they were there in person—or better yet, feel as if they were.
Another predominant component within liveness is spontaneity. While individuals differ in their ability to recognize spontaneity in a performer’s actions, it is greatly valued in a majority of the world’s music performance traditions (Engel and Keller n. pag.). The same scholars explain that the sensitivity towards spontaneous performance does not only correlate to the aesthetic appreciation of music but is instead integral in gauging the performer’s intentions in everyday situations (i.e. judging whether their behaviour is intended to deceive) (Engel and Keller n. pag.). Therefore, curating visuals that emphasize spontaneous decisions within a live performance plays a crucial role in forming perceptions of authenticity. Most importantly, Auslander cites Martin Barker (2003) who explains that spontaneous variability is based more on ideological rather than real experience: audiences strive to experience performances “as if they had elements of uniqueness, even though actual variations may be insignificant” (Auslander 64). To a large extent, this longing for a romanticized and natural experience of live music consumption can be linked to Nancy Baym’s idea of ‘relational labour’.
Baym describes ‘relational labour’ by explaining that the more technologically mediated society has become, the more emotions have come to be commodified as part of labour and the more emphasis is placed on embodied performances with a natural feeling (Baym 17). As a major constituent of YouTube’s participatory framework, Baym’s theory of relational labour is a defining factor when it comes to moulding perceptions of authentic live
Figure 2: Intimacy in liveness: Beyoncé approaches and engages directly with the camera in close proximity
