User:Ahn.cha/critique

Introduction

Prior to 2007, Alexander Ljung and Eric Wahlforss, co-founders of SoundCloud, felt unsatisfied by what they considered as a “lack of adequate tools” to distribute sounds online. To combat the shortage, Ljung and Wahlforss developed SoundCloud, a platform that would create a community for audio similar to how Flickr created a community for pictures. Although SoundCloud was initially introduced for prominent producers, the SoundCloud community grew into a “one for all creators of music” ranging from bedroom DJs to professional songwriters. Since its inception, SoundCloud has worked to create a stage to not only maximize exposure, but also to make connections with other musicians and acquire “career-sustaining fans” (Davis, 2015). However, upon first glance this online community is not structured like others. Every platform comes with their own unique design, but SoundCloud created a community with limited capabilities for interaction. Users connect and make friendships with others by following their profile. Musicians post online and talk to their fans by releasing new music. Music enthusiasts express their interests and individuality to their peers by liking or reposting music they found. But the feature of person-to-person communication, minus a simple inbox and commenting feature, is noticeably lacking on this particular platform. There are no timelines or status updates to materialize user thoughts into text; audio is the only language SoundCloud interacts in.

This distinctive surface layout of SoundCloud might initially challenge the notion of what an online community is, but by definition, an online community is any “virtual space” where users can “come together with others to converse, exchange information or other resources, learn, play, or just be with each other” (Kraut, 2012, p. 1). Despite its imperfections, SoundCloud qualifies as an online community. Not only will I argue for SoundCloud’s legitimacy, but I will also argue that there are three categories of online community interaction present amongst the platform that contributes to its flourishing environment; artist-to-artist, user-to-user, and community-to-user.

Artist-to-Artist

Artist-to-artist interaction refers to the communication and connectedness between established musicians and prospective musicians. This particular type of interaction is important because it allows artists to (1) set goals and standards for aspiring musicians, (2) foster an environment for direct feedback, and (3) increase commitment and contribution to the platform through added exposure. Intrinsic actions, or actions that “fulfill some basic desire,” are a primary reason why SoundCloud is considered a “wealth of undiscovered talent” (Kraut, 2012, p. 41; Davis, 2015). Artists such as Calvin Harris and Chris Brown have 5,000,000+ account followers indicating a level of super stardom, a “specific and highly challenging goal” for established and prospective musicians alike (Kraut, 2012, p. 47). If artists post content in the hopes of increased exposure, seeing successful artists allows them to visualize an obtainable objective. This creates an “intrinsically motivating” and “immersive experience” for aspiring musicians to challenge their limits while leaving them to be in charge of their content (Kraut, 2012, p. 47). Therefore, established musicians remain committed to SoundCloud’s platform because it allows them to distribute content to a fan base while exemplifying achievement. Potential artist then react by contributing their own content, committed to the goals of reaching the levels of success displayed by more established artists. This interaction promotes a community that continually interacts with one another to create new and relevant content.

User-to-user

Although SoundCloud fails to provide a multi-faceted platform for direct communication, it does allow user-to-user interaction to occur through what is known as musical identity. Because music provides a “vital lifeline to human interaction” that produces profound emotions, musical identity is a significant part in not only declaring “who you want to be,” but “who you are” (Hargreaves, 2002, p. 1). Every user is allocated a profile page where they can upload, like, or repost songs to the public. Therefore, similar to how FaceBook acts a social profile, SoundCloud acts as a music profile forming identity-based commitment, or commitment based on “[connectedness] to the group as a whole or its purpose,” amongst the SoundCloud community (Kraut, 2012, p. 80). Users first interact with other users by following ones they identity with. By following their profile, they willingly agree to keep track of their activity, including uploads and reposts, leading to continued participation. As users are more exposed to music they enjoy, they seek more interaction with users who share the same characteristics.

Even with its limitations, SoundCloud has managed to create an environment where users can connect to one another without the need for direct communication or labeling. Although “creating groups” and “clustering those who are similar to each other” are proven ways to create continued commitment, SoundCloud neglects this function on their platform because the level of interdependence on SoundCloud is so high (Kraut, 2012, p. 82, 83). As the SoundCloud mission statement claims, “On our mission to unmute the web, we’re dedicated to helping you capture and share the sounds you create. Whether that’s original music, podcasts or voice memos, we exist to bring your sounds front and center and aim to make sound a bigger part of our lives” (Soundcloud, 2011). SoundCloud promotes musical identity over everything, and expects users’ individuality to work interdependently to create continued interaction and commitment from user-to-user.

Community-to-user

Because the SoundCloud community directly deals with music copyrights and user privileges, there is a strict moderation system set in place to ensure legality and wellbeing. Although not directly visible on the homepage, there is a Community Guidelines page that explicitly states rules to “increase the ability for community members to know the norms” (Kraut, 2012, p. 148). Some is common sense, like ‘don’t be a bully’ or ‘criticize constructively,’ but there is also more specific content stated such as the warning system. On SoundCloud, users are messaged warnings if they violate any of the expressed norms. More than two written warnings and the user account will be terminated. Under extreme circumstances, SoundCloud reserves the right to terminate an account without warning as well. Not only does this system of “graduated sanctions” increase its legitimacy, but by prominently displaying the termination policy and leaving room for interpretation, users are left unsure about how much they can violate before reaching termination (Kraut, 2012, p. 162). This uncertainty limits user deviation and regulates behavior. Because “offering people reminders at the point of action” reduces the amount of violations, SoundCloud users must first comply that the music they are posting falls under the guidelines of copyright when posting songs (Kraut, 2012, p. 150). To put it one step further, SoundCloud has a music analytics system that listens to the song being uploaded. It detects similarities to copyrighted songs and if the user is found to have violated the copyright rules, the song is immediately removed from the account and the user is sent a warning.

Conclusion

SoundCloud might be viewed simply as a music playing application but the value it carries, as an online community, is immense. It might never tap the social potential of online communities such as FaceBook but for its intended purposes it is certainly a prominent and staying power. As a community focused on limiting text communication, SoundCloud provides a great study on how to build an interactive and productive community that is content focused. It also shows how an online community does not need to be text or message based in order to thrive. By providing an objective and a platform for sharing unlike any other, SoundCloud has not only re-conceptualized music identity, but also online community design as well.

Works Cited

Davis, G. (2015). Reporting On Soundcloud: Past, Present & Future. Retrieved December 8, 2015

Hargreaves, D. J., Miell, D., & MacDonald, R. A. (2002). What are musical identities, and why are they important. Musical identities, 1-20.

Kraut, R. E., Resnick, P., Kiesler, S., Burke, M., Chen, Y., Kittur, N., ... & Riedl, J. (2012). Building successful online communities: Evidence-based social design. Mit Press.

Soundcloud. (2011, October 13). Retrieved December 8, 2015, from http://soundcloud.tumblr.com/post/11399803198/on-our-mission-to-unmute-the-web-were-dedicated

Chase Ahn WC: 1,324