The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Entrepreneurial Labor among Cultural Producers: “Cool” Jobs in “Hot” Industries
Abstract
This article compares the work of fashion models and “new media workers” (those who work in the relatively new medium of the Internet as dot-com workers) in order to highlight the processes of entrepreneurial labor in culture industries. Based on interviews and participant-observation in New York City, we trace how entrepreneurial labor becomes intertwined with work identities in cultural industries both on and off the job. While workers are drawn to the autonomy, creativity and excitement that jobs in these media industries can provide, they have also come to accept as normal the high risks associated with this work. Diffused through media images, this normalization of risk serves as a model for how workers in other industries should behave under flexible employment conditions. Using interview data from within the fashion media and the dot-com world, we discuss eight forces that give rise to the phenomenon of entrepreneurial labor: the cultural quality of cool, creativity, autonomy, self-investment, compulsory networking, portfolio evaluations, international competition, and foreshortened careers. We also provide a model of what constitutes the hierarchy of “good work” in cultural industries, and we conclude with implications of what entrepreneurial labor means for theories of work.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Swift Trust and Temporary Groups
Meyerson, D., Weick, K. E., & Kramer, R. M. (1996) · Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research · doi:10.4135/9781452243610.n9 · Cited by 1,982 · cited 2×
“…rooms), the development of the new media industry has made project-based work more visible in the press, and, we think, elevated it as a general model (Batt et al. 2001; Boltanski and Chiapello 1999; Heydebrand 1999; Girard and Stark 2002; Grabher 2002a; cf. Meyerson, Weick, and Kramer 1996).”
Background
Cited by
In the Social Factory?: Immaterial Labour, Precariousness and Cultural Work
Gill, R., & Pratt, A. (2008) · Theory, Culture & Society · doi:10.1177/0263276408097794 · Cited by 1,361
What Do Platforms Do? Understanding the Gig Economy
Vallas, S., & Schor, J. B. (2020) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054857 · Cited by 1,354
Platform Practices in the Cultural Industries: Creativity, Labor, and Citizenship
Duffy, B. E., Poell, T., & Nieborg, D. B. (2019) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/2056305119879672 · Cited by 182
O’Meara, V. (2019) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/2056305119879671 · Cited by 161
Constructing the Platform-Specific Self-Brand: The Labor of Social Media Promotion
Scolere, L., Pruchniewska, U., & Duffy, B. E. (2018) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/2056305118784768 · Cited by 156
No funny business: Precarious work and emotional labour in stand-up comedy
Butler, N., & Stoyanova Russell, D. (2018) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/0018726718758880 · Cited by 117
Boulton, C. (2015) · tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society · doi:10.31269/triplec.v13i2.592 · Cited by 27
“Creator burnout is real”: Risk, responsibility, and un/speakability in the creator economy
Nguyen, R., & Duffy, B. E. (2026) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/14614448261459667 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Neff, G., Wissinger, E., & Zukin, S.
- Venue
- Social Semiotics
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2005-12
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 307-334
- ISSN
- 1035-0330 (ISSN-L)
- 1470-1219
- OpenAlex
- W2121583253
- Cited by
- 474
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 30.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.