IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v154y2019i2d10.1007_s10551-017-3484-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Straight from the Source? Media Framing of Creative Crowd Labor and Resultant Ethical Concerns

Author

Listed:
  • Kim Bartel Sheehan

    (University of Oregon)

  • Matthew Pittman

    (University of Oregon)

Abstract

Increasing numbers of marketers are turning to the crowd—members of the public engaged with brands via the Internet—to develop marketing and advertising campaigns. Some marketers use social media to connect directly with customers, while others use crowdsourcing agencies to harness the power of crowd labor. As more members of the public become aware of creative crowdsourcing, they look to the media to understand more about it. As a result, it is important to examine how the media currently frame creative crowdsourcing to the public, particularly when numerous ethical issues about crowdsourcing have been identified (e.g. work is devalued as crowdworkers earn little money and no benefits for their work). This study examines media coverage of creative crowdsourcing to examine how benefits and challenges are presented. Informed by a framework developed by Swain (Understanding and communicating science: new agendas in communication, Routledge, London, pp 209–232, 2009), results indicate that most media coverage focuses solely on benefits to the industry: benefits to the ‘crowd’ are rarely discussed, yet drawbacks to the crowd are mentioned more frequently than drawbacks for the industry. This provides a skewed vision of what creative crowdsourcing is and may affect participation in the practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Kim Bartel Sheehan & Matthew Pittman, 2019. "Straight from the Source? Media Framing of Creative Crowd Labor and Resultant Ethical Concerns," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 154(2), pages 575-585, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:154:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s10551-017-3484-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-017-3484-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-017-3484-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-017-3484-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rinor F. Kurteshi, 2018. "Information Sources Supporting Innovation In The Public Sector: The Case Of Kosovo," Oradea Journal of Business and Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 3(2), pages 22-31, September.
    2. Luo, Lianfa & Cheng, Zhiming & Ye, Qingqing & Cheng, Yanjun & Smyth, Russell & Yang, Zhiqing & Zhang, Le, 2024. "Nonmonetary awards and innovation: Evidence from winning China's Top Brand Contest," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    3. Livio Cricelli & Michele Grimaldi & Silvia Vermicelli, 2022. "Crowdsourcing and open innovation: a systematic literature review, an integrated framework and a research agenda," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 1269-1310, July.
    4. Salgado, Stéphane & Hemonnet-Goujot, Aurelie & Henard, David H. & de Barnier, Virginie, 2020. "The dynamics of innovation contest experience: An integrated framework from the customer’s perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 29-43.
    5. Xiaotie Deng & Yotam Gafni & Ron Lavi & Tao Lin & Hongyi Ling, 2021. "From Monopoly to Competition: Optimal Contests Prevail," Papers 2107.13363, arXiv.org.
    6. Llorente-Saguer, Aniol & Sheremeta, Roman M. & Szech, Nora, 2023. "Designing contests between heterogeneous contestants: An experimental study of tie-breaks and bid-caps in all-pay auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    7. Wangcheng Yan & Wenjun Zhou, 2023. "Is blockchain a cure for peer-to-peer lending?," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 321(1), pages 693-716, February.
    8. Hyejin Jang & Keeeun Lee & Byungun Yoon, 2017. "Development Of An Open Innovation Model For R&D Collaboration Between Large Firms And Small-Medium Enterprises (Smes) In Manufacturing Industries," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(01), pages 1-29, January.
    9. Ivan Fedorenko & Pierre Berthon, 2017. "Beyond the expected benefits: unpacking value co-creation in crowdsourcing business models," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 7(3), pages 183-194, December.
    10. Michael Babington & Sebastian J. Goerg & Carl Kitchens, 2020. "Do Tournaments With Superstars Encourage or Discourage Competition?," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 21(1), pages 44-63, January.
    11. Yigal Gerchak & Christian Schmid, 2022. "Principal–agent models where a principal is only affected by extreme performances," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(2), pages 468-477, March.
    12. Yuan Jin & Ho Cheung Brian Lee & Sulin Ba & Jan Stallaert, 2021. "Winning by Learning? Effect of Knowledge Sharing in Crowdsourcing Contests," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 836-859, September.
    13. Tu Nguyen & Jing Zhao, 2021. "Industry tournament incentives and corporate innovation," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(9-10), pages 1797-1845, October.
    14. repec:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:8:p:- is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Kathleen Diener & Dirk Luettgens & Frank Thomas Piller, 2019. "Intermediation For Open Innovation: Comparing Direct Versus Delegated Search Strategies Of Innovation Intermediaries," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(04), pages 1-20, June.
    16. Dan Li & Longying Hu, 2017. "Exploring the effects of reward and competition intensity on participation in crowdsourcing contests," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 27(3), pages 199-210, August.
    17. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    18. Yue Dai & Tianjun Feng & Christopher S. Tang & Xiaole Wu & Fuqiang Zhang, 2020. "Twenty Years in the Making: The Evolution of the Journal of Manufacturing & Service Operations Management," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 1-10, January.
    19. Florian Englmaier & Stefan Grimm & Dominik Grothe & David Schindler & Simeon Schudy, 2024. "The Efficacy of Tournaments for Nonroutine Team Tasks," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 42(4), pages 921-948.
    20. Lettl, Christopher & Rost, Katja & von Wartburg, Iwan, 2009. "Why are some independent inventors 'heroes' and others 'hobbyists'? The moderating role of technological diversity and specialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 243-254, March.
    21. Christoph Riedl & Victor P. Seidel, 2018. "Learning from Mixed Signals in Online Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1010-1032, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:154:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s10551-017-3484-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.