Do We Really Need Media Education 2.0? Teaching Media in the Age of Participatory Culture

  • David BuckinghamEmail author
Part of the Education Innovation Series book series (EDIN)


This chapter explores some of the implications of digital social media for media education. It seeks to challenge some of the euphoric celebration of the democratic and creative possibilities of these new media and to provide a more considered, critical basis for classroom practice. The chapter begins by considering some of the claims of those who have called for a radical shift in media education practice – so-called Media Studies 2.0. It argues that these claims are overstated and ignore some of the limitations of new media as well as their more problematic aspects. It particularly points to some of the pedagogical problems that are raised by this approach and its rather superficial celebration of participation and creativity. The chapter then moves on to consider some alternative approaches, building on the long tradition of media education in the UK: these approaches are especially premised on the need to combine, and create a dialogue between, critical theory and creative practice.


Media education Digital media Media 2.0 Pedagogy Critical analysis Creative practice 


  1. Auchard, E. (2007). Participation on Web 2.0 sites remains weak. Retrieved December 3, 2007, from Reuters,
  2. Barbrook, R., & Cameron, A. (1996). The Californian ideology. Retrieved November 8, 2008, from
  3. Buckingham, D. (2003). Media education: Literacy, learning and contemporary culture. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  4. Buckingham, D. (2006). Is there a digital generation? In D. Buckingham & R. Willett (Eds.), Digital generations: Children, young people and new media (pp. 1–17). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  5. Buckingham, D. (2007). Beyond technology: Children’s learning in the age of digital culture. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  6. Buckingham, D. (2009). “Creative” visual methods in media research: Possibilities, problems and proposals. Media, Culture and Society, 31(4), 633–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Buckingham, D., & Burn, A. (2007). Game literacy in theory and practice. Journal of Educational Media and Hypermedia, 16, 323–349.Google Scholar
  8. Buckingham, D., & Willett, R. (Eds.). (2009). Video cultures: Media technology and amateur creativity. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  9. Buckingham, D., Harvey, I., & Sefton-Green, J. (1999). The difference is digital? Digital technology and student media production. Convergence, 5, 10–20.Google Scholar
  10. Buckingham, D. with Banaji, S., Burn, A., Carr, D., Cranmer, S., & Willett, R. (2005). The media literacy of children and young people: A review of the academic research. London: Ofcom.Google Scholar
  11. Buckingham, D., Pini, M., & Willett, R. (2007). “Take back the tube!” The discursive construction of amateur film-and video-making. Journal of Media Practice, 8, 183–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Buckingham, D., Willett, R., & Pini, M. (2011). Home truths? Video production and domestic life. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burgess, J. (2006). Hearing ordinary voices: Cultural studies, vernacular creativity and digital storytelling. Continuum, 20, 201–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Burn, A. (2000). Repackaging the slasher movie: Digital unwriting of film in the classroom. English in Australia, 127–8, 1–19.Google Scholar
  15. Burn, A., & Durran, J. (2006). Digital anatomies: Analysis as production in media education. In D. Buckingham & R. Willett (Eds.), Digital generations: Children, young people and new media (pp. 273–294). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  16. Burn, A., & Durran, J. (2007). Media literacy in schools. London: Paul Chapman.Google Scholar
  17. Chalfen, R. (1987). Snapshot versions of life. Bowling Green: Bowling Green State University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Cohen, P. (1990). Really useful knowledge. Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham.Google Scholar
  19. Drotner, K. (2008). Learning is hard work: Digital practices and future competencies. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), Youth, identity and digital media (pp. 167–184). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  20. Erstad, O., Gilje, O., & de Lange, T. (2007). Remixing multimodal resources: Multiliteracies and digital production in Norwegian media education. Learning, Media and Technology, 27, 183–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gauntlett, D. (2007). Wide angle: Is it time for media studies 2.0? Media Education Association Newsletter, 5, 3–5.Google Scholar
  22. Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  23. Grossberg, L. (1995). Cultural studies vs. political economy: Is anybody else bored with this debate? Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 12, 72–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hargittai, E., & Walejko, G. (2008). The participation divide: Content creation and sharing and the digital age. Information, Communication and Society, 11, 239–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Herring, S. (2008). Questioning the generational divide: Technological exoticism and adult constructions of online youth identity. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), Youth, identity and digital media (pp. 71–92). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  26. Jenkins, H. with Clinton, K., Purushotma, R., Robison, A. J., & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Retrieved November 27, 2007, from
  27. Knobel, M., & Lankshear, C. (Eds.). (2007). A new literacies sampler. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  28. Learning, Media and Technology. (2007). Special issue: ‘Media Education Goes Digital’ 27(2). D. Buckingham & S. Bragg (Eds.).Google Scholar
  29. Lenhart, A., Madden, M., Macgill, A. R., & Smith, A. (2007). Teens and social media. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project.Google Scholar
  30. Luke, C. (2000). Cyber-schooling and technological change: Multiliteracies for new times. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 69–91). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Marvin, C. (1988). When old technologies were new. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Media International Australia. (2006). Special issue: ‘Media Education’ 120. S. Bragg, D. Buckingham, & S. Turnbull (Eds.).Google Scholar
  33. Merrin, W. (2008). Media studies 2.0. Retrieved March 16, 2009, from
  34. Murdoch, R. (2006). His space (interview by Spencer Reiss). Wired, 14(07). Retrieved April 12, 2007, from
  35. Ofcom. (2008). Media literacy: Report on UK children’s media literacy. London: Ofcom.Google Scholar
  36. Pelletier, C. (2009). Games and learning: What’s the connection? International Journal of Learning and Media, 1(1). Retrieved March 18, 2009, from
  37. Robins, K., & Webster, F. (1999). Times of the technoculture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Ross, A. (2003). No-collar: The humane workplace and its hidden costs. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Streeter, T. (1987). The cable fable revisited: Discourse, policy and the making of cable television. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 4, 174–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Winston, B. (1998). Media, technology and society: A history. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Social SciencesLoughborough UniversityLoughboroughUK

Personalised recommendations