Suchergebnisse

In my early "Processing Fads and Fashions: An Organization-Set Analysis of Cultural Industry Systems" (1972), the middle "throughput" phase, or most organizational aspect of cultural industries, was emphasized. In this depoliticized exploration of what Adorno (1991) had earlier characterized as the industrialization of high culture, and Powdermaker (1950) as Hollywood's "dream factory," I emphasized the key roles of gatekeeper and distributor organizations as critical in connecting the artist/creators to audience/consumers of mass, or "popular" culture (as it had more acceptingly come to be called). Altogether, this network of organizations—from creators (artists, musicians, actors, writers) and brokers (agents), through the cultural product's producers (publishers, studios), distributors (wholesalers, theaters), and media outlets—collectively constitute cultural industries. This article on industries producing "cultural products"—defined as " 'nonmaterial' goods directed at a public of consumers, for whom they generally serve an esthetic or expressive, rather than a clearly utilitarian function" (Hirsch 1972 p. 641)—appeared at the same time that organizational sociology's focus on what became known as the "production of culture" took off, and continued to flourish into the 1990s (Peterson 1994, Crane 1992). How has the study of cultural industries changed over the last generation? A simple answer is that the subject—the key role of distribution and the importance of organizational middlemen in the making and sale of popular culture—remains analytically the same. From actors, musicians, and writers; through studios, labels and publishers, to videocassettes, movie theaters, record stores, and booksellers (in stores or via the Internet)—cultural products flow. How this sequence is organized and traversed remains a fascinating forest of power plays and techniques, employed by role-occupants in the same positions as have existed since the advent of mass media. While this substantive field has changed little analytically, what we also see is a wondrous expansion in the disciplinary approaches being taken to examine the multitude of topics available for examination under the broad rubric and framing of the term, "cultural industries." Because I was a graduate student at the time (my roommate dared me to submit the "Processing…" paper to the American Journal of Sociology), it is a great pleasure to find the concept has retained its value for other researchers since that time. In this article, I will (1) reexamine and discuss the original framing of the term cultural industries; (2) briefly review some of the more recent complementary perspectives which expand the possible arenas for studying this topic; and (3) append a short note on how the more recent inclusion of nonprofit cultural products(e.g., symphonies, museums) in this framework poses interesting analytical questions and opportunities.

Aesthetics of television criticism : mapping critics reviews in an era of industry transformation / Denise D. Bielby, Molly Moloney, Bob Q. Ngo -- Institutional logics and institutional change in organizations : transformation in accounting, architecture, and publishing / Patricia H. Thornton, Candace Jones, Kenneth Kury -- Typecasting and generalism in firm and market : genre-based career concentration in the feature film industry, 1933-1995 / Ezra W. Zuckerman -- The telecom industry as cultural industry? : the transposition of fashion logics into the field of mobile telephony / Marie-Laure Djelic, Antti Ainamo -- Charting gender : the success of female acts in the U.S. mainstream recording market, 1940-1990 / Timothy J. Dowd, Kathleen Liddle, Maureen Blyler -- Transformation in cultural industries / Candace Jones, Patricia H. Thornton. - The cultural industries have been considered unique and out of the mainstream, not a subject for developing general theory, and therefore relatively understudied by organizational scholars. We argue it is no longer the case that cultural industries are so uniquerepresenting small markets and industries of little matter to research in the sociology of organizations. Cultural industries are now one of the fastest growing and most vital sectors in the U.S. and global economies (U.S. Census Reports, 2000). This growth is fueled in large part by the nature of the symbolic, creative, and knowledge-based assets of cultural industries. In this volume, the manuscripts recognize that the functions of the symbolic, creative, and knowledge-based assets of cultural industries are also characteristic of the professional services and other industries as well. The manuscripts illustrate how the boundaries become blurred between cultural and other related industries that also rest upon the endeavors of and knowledge of creative workers. These dynamic interactions in the commercial landscape between the cultural, professional services, and other industries provide a richer context for the authors in this volume to examine changes in a specific market or industry, and also to advance our understanding of the institutional transformation of organizations

This paper focuses on cultural industries. They are becoming a part of culture on the national level because they create both the symbolic and the economic capital. The research proves that investment in cultural industries is beneficial; they help to attract tourists and investors from other countries, improve the image of the country and increase awareness about it. Cultural industries are becoming a perspective area of economy. In Europe and other countries of the world, cultural industries have appeared as a branch of private business which do not require state support; however, the subsequent development of these industries and their successful competition with international corporates of cultural industries require purposeful state policy. Recently, the notion of cultural industries has been included into the cultural policy. Political decisions determine certain changes in cultural industries and their influence on the culture in a country. Countries can shape their policy of cultural industries in different ways; they can select the means to implement the policy depending on their aims and to establish institutions to implement them. The following models of the policy of cultural industries are distinguished: paternalistic, patronal, and liberal; they indicate a state's approach towards cultural policies and help to understand and evaluate its decisions in the area of the management of cultural industries. Therefore, the aim of the article is to reveal the extent of control imposed on cultural industries in the state policy. The first part of the article surveys the notion of cultural industries and the areas attributed to them. The second part analyses cultural industries as an area of cultural policy, and the last part describes possible models of the policy of cultural industries.

This paper focuses on cultural industries. They are becoming a part of culture on the national level because they create both the symbolic and the economic capital. The research proves that investment in cultural industries is beneficial; they help to attract tourists and investors from other countries, improve the image of the country and increase awareness about it. Cultural industries are becoming a perspective area of economy. In Europe and other countries of the world, cultural industries have appeared as a branch of private business which do not require state support; however, the subsequent development of these industries and their successful competition with international corporates of cultural industries require purposeful state policy. Recently, the notion of cultural industries has been included into the cultural policy. Political decisions determine certain changes in cultural industries and their influence on the culture in a country. Countries can shape their policy of cultural industries in different ways; they can select the means to implement the policy depending on their aims and to establish institutions to implement them. The following models of the policy of cultural industries are distinguished: paternalistic, patronal, and liberal; they indicate a state's approach towards cultural policies and help to understand and evaluate its decisions in the area of the management of cultural industries. Therefore, the aim of the article is to reveal the extent of control imposed on cultural industries in the state policy. The first part of the article surveys the notion of cultural industries and the areas attributed to them. The second part analyses cultural industries as an area of cultural policy, and the last part describes possible models of the policy of cultural industries.

This paper focuses on cultural industries. They are becoming a part of culture on the national level because they create both the symbolic and the economic capital. The research proves that investment in cultural industries is beneficial; they help to attract tourists and investors from other countries, improve the image of the country and increase awareness about it. Cultural industries are becoming a perspective area of economy. In Europe and other countries of the world, cultural industries have appeared as a branch of private business which do not require state support; however, the subsequent development of these industries and their successful competition with international corporates of cultural industries require purposeful state policy. Recently, the notion of cultural industries has been included into the cultural policy. Political decisions determine certain changes in cultural industries and their influence on the culture in a country. Countries can shape their policy of cultural industries in different ways; they can select the means to implement the policy depending on their aims and to establish institutions to implement them. The following models of the policy of cultural industries are distinguished: paternalistic, patronal, and liberal; they indicate a state's approach towards cultural policies and help to understand and evaluate its decisions in the area of the management of cultural industries. Therefore, the aim of the article is to reveal the extent of control imposed on cultural industries in the state policy. The first part of the article surveys the notion of cultural industries and the areas attributed to them. The second part analyses cultural industries as an area of cultural policy, and the last part describes possible models of the policy of cultural industries.

This paper focuses on cultural industries. They are becoming a part of culture on the national level because they create both the symbolic and the economic capital. The research proves that investment in cultural industries is beneficial; they help to attract tourists and investors from other countries, improve the image of the country and increase awareness about it. Cultural industries are becoming a perspective area of economy. In Europe and other countries of the world, cultural industries have appeared as a branch of private business which do not require state support; however, the subsequent development of these industries and their successful competition with international corporates of cultural industries require purposeful state policy. Recently, the notion of cultural industries has been included into the cultural policy. Political decisions determine certain changes in cultural industries and their influence on the culture in a country. Countries can shape their policy of cultural industries in different ways; they can select the means to implement the policy depending on their aims and to establish institutions to implement them. The following models of the policy of cultural industries are distinguished: paternalistic, patronal, and liberal; they indicate a state's approach towards cultural policies and help to understand and evaluate its decisions in the area of the management of cultural industries. Therefore, the aim of the article is to reveal the extent of control imposed on cultural industries in the state policy. The first part of the article surveys the notion of cultural industries and the areas attributed to them. The second part analyses cultural industries as an area of cultural policy, and the last part describes possible models of the policy of cultural industries.

Preface and acknowledgements -- Framework -- Race and the cultural industries -- Approaching race and cultural production -- Media, race and power -- Capitalism, race and the ambivalence of commodification -- "Diversity" in media and cultural policy -- The cultural politics of production -- The racialisation of the cultural commodity -- Enabling race-making in the cultural industries -- Conclusion -- References -- Index

The Cultural Industries of India is the first book length study dedicated to Indian cultural and creative industries.The chapters offer a comprehensive overview of the relationship between the cultural and creative industries and the wider economic, social, cultural and political processes taking place within India and its diaspora

section 1. Perspectives -- section 2. Country experiences