[Bp_localcontent] Local Content Definition - maybe Locally Relevant Content

[Konstantinos Komaitis]

Hi all,

I think we need to think of content in the broadest sense we can — at least for the time being. And, before we attempt to provide a definition (mindful that there is not an accepted definition out there), it would be good to ask the question: why is local content so important and relevant, i.e. what is the end-goal? We are talking a lot and hearing much more how local content is a tool for social, economic and political empowerment. If this is the case (end-goal) — and I believe it is — we then need to consider local content as content that is created and produced locally, that is locally-relevant, that has a locally-specific audience and all other categories that have been identified in this thread.

I would like to point this group to a report from the OECD, ISOC and UNESCO on “The Relationship between local content, Internet development and access prices) which I believe can provide us some good guidance: http://www.internetsociety.org/sites/default/files/The%20Relationship%20Between%20Local%20Content%2C%20Internet%20Development%2C%20and%20Access%20Prices.pdf 

In terms of definition, the research showed: 

"Currently, there is no uniform definition of local content. For the purpose of this analysis this study relies on a UNESCO definition that states that local content must be relevant and comprehensible to local users (UNESCO, 2001). In harmony with this description, this paper considers all digital content created for an end user who speaks the same language as the author to be local content. This includes content created for people who do not live in close proximity to the creator, but thanks to the Internet, are part of a world-wide ‘local’ community of same-language speakers. The language criterion is primarily intended to exclude translated content. No stipulations about the author of local content are made (i.e. individuals, governments and businesses all qualify).”

Best

Konstantinos


Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis
Policy Advisor,
Internet Society
komaitis at isoc.org
tel: +41 22 807 1453


On 09 Jul 2014, at 11:36, Chris Zielinski <chris at chriszielinski.com> wrote:

> Thanks for this clarifier, Mike. But I feel it would be a mistake to narrow the discussion only to locally-produced content. Where it is produced, local content should be supported and cherished, but historically, content is almost always adapted. This is just as true of music and film, as it is of development initiatives and health practices.
>  
> In addition to supporting indigenous local content generation, thus, strengthening local capabilities to adapt and make appropriate content arriving from elsewhere is surely the dominant need.
>  
> This is a form of glocalization (an ugly word, to be sure): glocal content (content that is developed internationally and applied locally, ideally adapted for local use) is at least as important as local content.
>  
> To give an example from the health field, there is a lengthy list of simple, effective health practices that could decimate child mortality (a famous series of Lancet articles enumerated them). However, these practices need to be adapted for use locally in each country. There is no need to develop original indigenous responses - it would in fact be wasteful of energy, unlikely to be effective, and ultimately fatal for many children, to try and come up with completely original local solutions. What is urgently needed is to adapt the tried and tested solutions (using locally available medicines, technologies and practices) and then to apply them.
>  
> Best,
>  
> Chris
> chris at chriszielinski.com
>  
> Chris spent over 20 years in WHO and other UN organizations in India, the Middle East and Africa. He also headed an authors' copyright agency (ALCS), and was on the boards of various film directors', educational recording, Internet governance and ethics groupings.
> 
> On July 8, 2014 at 11:56 PM Mike Jensen <mike at apc.org> wrote: 
> > 
> > 
> > On 08-07-2014 13:53, Blackler, Ellen M. wrote: 
> > > We have actually been using the term locally-relevant 
> > > content in an attempt to capture the idea that it is whatever the user 
> > > decides is relevant to the communities (either physical or virtual) that 
> > > they see themselves belonging to. 
> > 
> > I think there is a big difference between 'locally relevant content' 
> > and 'local content'. I thought this discussion was focussing on the 
> > latter - i.e on how to develop the local content industry. 
> > 
> > "Locally relevant content" is not a term I've seen used much. I think it 
> > causes confusion and for me it doesn't provide a good lens for this 
> > discussion (assuming we are here to talk about _locally generated_ 
> > content). By implication, of course the user wants 'locally relevant 
> > content' anything else will be ignored. And that's the beauty of the 
> > internet vs the broadcast model - you only need get what you want. 
> > 
> > And today, a major portion of the content that people consume is user 
> > generated content - blogs, facebook, youtube, flickr, twitter etc. 
> > 
> > 
> > Mike 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________ 
> > Bp_localcontent mailing list 
> > Bp_localcontent at intgovforum.org 
> > http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/bp_localcontent_intgovforum.org
> Chris Zielinski 
> chris at chriszielinski.com
> _______________________________________________
> Bp_localcontent mailing list
> Bp_localcontent at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/bp_localcontent_intgovforum.org