The Documentary Designer: A List of Propositions for Interactive Documentary Practice Online



This chapter proposes that interactive documentary needs to utilise the affordances of the network in a way similar to other online media. To help with this, documentary can use design methods to identify the affordances of the network to then connect media into a web of relations. Design in this context is also a process that responds to problems that arise through change, and this ability to negotiate change is key in the fast-paced environment of the Internet.


Interactive documentary Documentary Design User experience design Interaction design Design and documentary 


  1. Bas, Berke, and Florian Thalhofer. Planet Galata: A Bridge in Istanbul, 2010, Web.Google Scholar
  2. Bordwell, David, and Kristin Thompson. Film Art: An Introduction. 9th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2010.Google Scholar
  3. Brachet, A., and A. Szalat. Gaza Sderot, 2008, Web.Google Scholar
  4. Brooks, Kevin M. “Do Story Agents Use Rocking Chairs? The Theory and Implementation of One Model for Computational Narrative.” Proceedings of Multimedia ’96. Boston: ACM Press, 1996. 317–328.Google Scholar
  5. Buchanan, Richard. “Wicked Problems in Design Thinking.” Design Issues 8.2 (1992): 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buxton, Bill. Sketching User Experiences. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, 2007.Google Scholar
  7. Crossover Labs. “Korsakow – Not the Linear-Causal Way of Thinking.” Crossover Labs, January 1, 2015, Web.Google Scholar
  8. Douglas, J. Yellowlees. The End of Books or Books Without End?: Reading Interactive Narratives. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1999.Google Scholar
  9. Dovey, Jon, and Mandy Rose. “We’re Happy and We Know It: Documentary: Data: Montage.” Studies in Documentary Film 6.2 (2012): 159–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dressen, Arnaud, et al. Klynt. Computer Program. Paris, France: Honkytonk Films, 2012.Google Scholar
  11. Dufresne, David, and Philippe Brault. Prison Valley. 2010, Web.Google Scholar
  12. Dunbar, Michael. “Beyond Skin Deep: Exploring the Contribution of Communication Design Within Interaction Design Projects.” RMIT University, M.Des. Thesis, 2009.Google Scholar
  13. Gaudenzi, Sandra. The Living Documentary: From Representing Reality to Co-creating Reality in Digital Interactive Documentary. Goldsmiths, University of London, PhD Thesis, 2013.Google Scholar
  14. Kimbell, Lucy. “Rethinking Design Thinking: Part 1.” Design and Culture 3.3 (2011): 285–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Manovich, Lev. The Language of New Media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001.Google Scholar
  16. Manovich, Lev. “The Practice of Everyday (Media) Life.” Video Vortex Reader: Responses to Youtube. Ed. Geert Lovink and Sabine Niederer. Amsterdam: XS4ALL, 2008. 33–44.Google Scholar
  17. Merrin, William. “Studying Me-Dia: The Problem of Method in a Post-broadcast Age.” Media Studies 2.0, 2010, Web.Google Scholar
  18. Miles, Adrian. “Softvideography: Digital Video as Postliterate Practice.” Small Tech: The Culture of Digital Tools. Ed. Byron Hawk, David M. Rieder and Ollie Oviedo. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2008a. 10–21.Google Scholar
  19. Miles, Adrian. “Programmatic Statements for a Facetted Videography.” Video Vortex Reader: Responses to Youtube. Ed. Geert Lovink and Sabine Niederer. Amsterdam: XS4ALL, 2008b. 223–230.Google Scholar
  20. Mozilla. Popcorn Maker. Computer Program. Mozilla, 2010.Google Scholar
  21. Murray, Janet Horowitz. Inventing the Medium: Principles of Interaction Design as a Cultural Practice. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2012.Google Scholar
  22. Nash, Kate. “Modes of Interactivity: Analysing a Webdoc.” Media, Culture and Society 34.2 (2012): 195–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nielsen, Jakob. “Writing Style for Print vs. Web.” Nielsen Norman Group, 2008, Web.Google Scholar
  24. Norman, Donald. The Design of Everyday Things. New York: Basic Book, 1998.Google Scholar
  25. Norman, Donald. “Affordance, Conventions and Design (Part 2).” Don Norman: Designing for People, 1999, Web.Google Scholar
  26. O’Flynn, Siobhan. “Documentary’s Metamorphic Form: Webdoc, Interactive, Transmedia, Participatory and Beyond.” Studies in Documentary Film 6.2 (2012): 141–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Plantinga, Carl R. Rhetoric and Representation in Nonfiction Film. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  28. Rowe, Peter. Design Thinking. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  29. Ryan, Marie-Laure. “Beyond Myth and Metaphor: Narrative in Digital Media.” Poetics Today 23.4 (2002): 581–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ryan, Marie-Laure. Narrative Across Media: The Languages of Storytelling. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2004.Google Scholar
  31. Schön, Donald. The Reflective Practitioner. London: Ashgate, 1983.Google Scholar
  32. Soar, Matt. “Making (with) the Korsakow System: Database Documentaries as Articulation and Assemblage.” New Documentary Ecologies. Ed. Kate Nash, Craig Hight and Catherine Summerhayes. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. 154–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Soar, Matt, and Florian Thalhofer, “Release Notes.” Korsakow: The Next Level Story, 2005, Web.Google Scholar
  34. Thackara, John. In the Bubble: Designing a Complex World. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2005.Google Scholar
  35. Thalhofer, Florian. Korsakow. Computer Program, 2000.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Media and CommunicationRMIT UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations