Networked Co-Curation in Virtual Museums: Digital Humanities,History,and Social Media in the Toledo's Attic Project

Abstract

Networked co-curation is an innovative outreach practice in archives and museums using social media with other Web 2.0 technologies in order to curate digital heritage collections. It relies on crowd-sourced curation, which results in richer discourse through globally dispersed public participation and intersubjective perspectives. The theoretical framework for networked co-curation consists of three dimensions: digital history, digital humanities, and social network theory. Historical representation, intertextuality, and remediation play a vital role in networked co-curation, forming a bridge between digital content and a transforming virtual audience. Networked co-curation present three significant concerns for archives, libraries, and museums: provenance verification, knowledge representation, and staffing. Toledo's Attic has been a co-curation initiative involving multi-type organizations and their respective audiences. It has used various types of software and platforms and is now being migrated to Joomla, which has been the most robust solution thus far. The networked co-curation and outreach program for Toledo's Attic has utilized the following networks: Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, Delicious, BlogSpot, Pinterest, HistoryPin, and YouTube with the Website occupying a central location for each reach to it virtual audience. Data gathered from Google Analytics and Facebook point to relationship between co-curation activities across these domains but continuous data collection is necessary for informed management of this content.

Keywords

networked co-curation digital humanities digital history hypertext intertextuality co-curation social media historical representation knowledge representation Web 2.0 digital archive heritage collections virtual museums Toledo's Attic

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ankersmit

F. R.

, 2001. Historical Representation. Stanford University Press, Stanford, Ca.

Avery

J. M.

, 2010. The Democratization of Metadata: Collective Tagging, Folksonomies and Web 2.0. Library Student Journal. http://www.librarystudentjournal.org/index.php/lsj/article/view/135/268 (accessed 25 June 2011).

Bar-Ilan

, 2010. The Effects of Background Information and Social Interaction on Image Tagging Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(5), pp. 940–51.

Bolter

J. D.

, 2000. Remediation: Understanding New Media. MIT Press: Cambridge, Mass.

Cohen

D. J.

, 2006. Digital History: A Guide to Gathering, Preserving, and Presenting the Past on the Web. University of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia. http://chnm.gmu.edu/digitalhistory/(accessed 12 May 2010).

Digital Curation Centre. n. d. “What is Digital Curation?” http://www.dcc.ac.uk/digital-curation/what-digital-curation (accessed 20 July 2012).

Ding

, 2010. Upper Tag Ontology for Integrating Social Tagging Data. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(3), 505–21.

Geertz

, 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. Basic Books: New York.

HASTAC Scholars Program, 2012. “The Future of Museums.” http://hastac.org/forums/future-museums (accessed 31 July 2012).

10.

HistoryPin, Toledo's Attic, 2012. http://www.historypin.com/channels/view/7067010/#/home (accessed 17 September, 2012).

11.

Kadushin

, 2004

“Some Basic Network Concepts and Propositions.”

Introduction to Social Network Theory (draft, PDF file), 63 pp. http://hevra.haifa.ac.il/∼soc/lecturers/talmud/files/521.pdf (accessed 4 August 2011).

12.

Kress

, 2000. Text as a Punctuation of Semiosis: Pulling at Some of the Threads. In: Intertextuality and the Media: From Genre to Everyday Life. Meinhof

U. H.

(eds.) Manchester University Press: Manchester, pp. 132–54.

13.

Kristeva

Julia

, 1980. Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. Columbia University Press, New York.

14.

Landow

G. P.

, 1992. Hypertext: The Convergence of Contemporary Critical Theory and Technology. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

15.

Landow

G. P.

, 2006. Hypertext 3.0: Critical theory and new media in an Era of Globalization. Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore.

16.

Lee

C. A.

, 2007. Digital Curation and Trusted Repositories: Steps toward Success. Journal of Digital Information, 8(2) (accessed 6 August 2011).

17.

Lee

H-J.

, 2010. A New Model for Semantic Photograph Description Combining Basic Levels and User-Assigned Descriptors. Journal of Information Science, 36(5), pp. 547–65.

18.

Palmer

C. E.

, 2004. Thematic Research Collections. In: A Companion to Digital Humanities. ed. Schreibman

(eds.): Blackwell, Oxford. http://www.digitalhumanities.org/companion/(accessed 15 March 2010).

19.

Peterson

, 2006. “Beneath the Metadata; Some Philosophical Problems with Folksonomy.” D-Lib Magazine 12(11) (accessed June 25, 2011).

20.

Roegiers

, 2008. History is 3D: Presenting a Framework for Meaningful Historical Representation in Digital Media. In: New Heritage: New Media and Cultural Heritage. Yehuda Kalay (eds.). Routledge, New York, pp. 67–77.

21.

Schreibman

, 2004. A Companion to Digital Humanities. ed. Schreibman

(eds.): Blackwell, Oxford. http://www.digitalhumanities.org/companion/(accessed 15 March 2010).

22.

Stayton

, 2008. “Crowd-Curated or Crowd-Juried?” 2008. http://www.brooklynmuseum.org/community/blogosphere/2008/07/23/crowd-curated-or-crowd-juried/(accessed 31 August 2012).

23.

Theimer

, 2010. Web 2.0 Tools and Strategies for Archives and Local History Collections. Neal-Schuman Publishers, New York.

24.

Toledo's Attic , 2012. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Toledos-Attic/118712334864 (accessed 17 September 2012).

25.

Toledo's Attic, 2012. https://twitter.com/toledosattic (accessed 18 December 2012).

26.

Whatwasthere.com, 2012, http://www.whatwasthere.com (accessed 17 September, 2012).