This
project is definitely one of the most fun projects that I have ever worked on,
and it was also the most challenging. My process was not the most efficient,
but it ended up working well for me. I started off by going to the archives in
the Carolina Room at the Main Public Library Branch and seeing which stations
had gained the most local press, not just in terms of popularity but also in
terms of community involvement and overall programming impact. After collecting
that information, I went in search of music recordings from live performances
on those popular stations because I figured that these recordings could help me
delve further into other live performances as well as material played by the
music staff on air. I did find a recording of The Golden Gate Quartet and that
made it on to our exhibit. Following that, my research went in the direction of
looking at the role that these stations played in the community, especially in
terms of music and catering to specific audiences. That said, researching radio
is a challenging process because most of its aural history is not preserved on
the internet and it is frustrating not being able to find full recordings or
transcripts from significant interviews or performances. That said, news
articles and photos are a rich source for learning about the role that the
stations played in the community.
In the view of
community radio developers, community radio stations often “serve as the most
trusted agent in town that brings change.” Community radio plays a vital role
in building vibrant communities, in mobilizing groups to action by informing
and empowering citizens, in giving voice to the marginalized groups of society,
and in bringing community needs to the attention of local and even national
governments. The scope of the actual and potential impact of community radio is
wide-ranging, many agree, as are the challenges associated with community radio
development. Community radio activists who have seen both the benefits and the
difficulties of community radio claim that the donor community does not fully
recognize the wide-ranging benefits of community radio in development and thus
fail to respond to the challenges of this media sector.
Our
group worked well together, which made face-to-face meetings quite enjoyable
and a refreshing change from the usual group projects where one person takes
over and everyone else just sits by the wayside. While we did not stick as
closely to the schedule as we would have liked, I thought that everyone stuck
to the tasks that we decided on at the beginning of the semester. In addition
to that, these tasks were done well, making a strong final product. Most of the
tasks that we had assigned ourselves to complete were done later in the
semester than we had originally intended to, creating something of a time
crunch right at the end, at least for me. I can only speak for my own
individual experience, but I had difficulty getting started and then following
through with what was outlined on the group contract. As someone who has never
worked in the field of digital history before, I think that I was in shock when
I finally buckled down and really started doing serious research and analyzing
possible parts of my sections of the exhibit. In my classes I was interested in
a balance between learning technical
skills and making progress on a group project over the course of the semester. The members of our group chose and edited their
own sections, created their own inventory of digital items, and built their own
exhibits. The upside is that we were able to jump right in on our own digital
projects by the time we had our basic planning done. The downside is that we
didn’t get to experience that process of installation. It also meant that when
some groups were dissatisfied with the Omeka template choices, they didn’t have
the skill set themselves to create new ones. Still, by not having the option to
create our own installations, I found that our group was able to concentrate
more on building a structure and content base for the projects. That said, we
were mostly concerned with presenting interesting and accurate information than
with creating the best exhibit on Omeka. While we did want an attractive end
product, the main concern was making our passion for the topic jump off the
screen. Our group then decided that each of us should be responsible for
ensuring the success of a particular portion of the exhibit building
process. Ian Pasquini is very tech savvy and so he was in charge of
the website itself, as well as contemporary music venues. Reggie
Rucker was in charge of African American venues and the timeline, a task that
he volunteered to do right at the very end. Tina Wright is
incredibly organized and works in Special Collections at UNC Charlotte, so she
was a logical choice to do research on the older music venues of Charlotte
since that category was the most obscure. I was in charge of researching music
radio in Charlotte and I also entered in all of the bibliographical
information.
We were all able to locate ten significant/relevant
artifacts for each section, scan those items and then upload those images to
the Omeka website, and answer many questions without outside assistance.
However, Google and email were our most useful tools. The creation
of our exhibit was very much an experience in trial and error. We’ve also communicated
frequently throughout this process, and also kept one another alerted of any
issues that arose. However, we also felt free to go in the direction that was fitted
to the direction of our individual research processes. Our project
went more smoothly than I could have ever anticipated, and the topics that we
chose to research were interesting and lent themselves well to in-depth
archival research. Everyone in the group was driven to work hard and the final
product is representative of everyone’s hard work.
No comments:
Post a Comment