Production, Consumption, Prosumption: The nature of capitalism in the age of the digital ‘prosumer’
Abstract
This article deals with the rise of prosumer capitalism. Prosumption involves both production and consumption rather than focusing on either one (production) or the other (consumption). It is maintained that earlier forms of capitalism (producer and consumer capitalism) were themselves characterized by prosumption. Given the recent explosion of user-generated content online, we have reason to see prosumption as increasingly central. In prosumer capitalism, control and exploitation take on a different character than in the other forms of capitalism: there is a trend toward unpaid rather than paid labor and toward offering products at no cost, and the system is marked by a new abundance where scarcity once predominated. These trends suggest the possibility of a new, prosumer, capitalism.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Prevailing accounts explain digital economic circulation as networked exchange relations characterised by disintermediated, collaborative and democratising qualities, using concepts such as co-production, prosumption and peer-to-peer.
“Prevailing accounts deploy concepts such as 'co-production', 'prosumption' and 'peer-to-peer' to explain digital economic circulation as networked exchange relations characterised by their disintermediated, collaborative and democratising qualities.”
From Platform capitalism: The intermediation and capitalisation of digital economic circulation (2017) · cites this paper as Ritzer and Jurgensen, 2010
'Prosumers' (students) as digital natives who are techno-savvy enjoy the use of Web 2.0 applications with good user-friendliness and swift communication.
“In support of this, 'prosumers'(students) as digital natives who are techno-savvy enjoy the use of Web 2.0 applications with good user-friendliness and swift communication (Clement, 2020;Ritzer and Jurgenson, 2010).”
From Emergent transition from face-to-face to online learning in a South African University in the context of the Coronavirus pandemic (2020) · cites this paper as Ritzer and Jurgenson, 2010
Cites
Terranova, T. (2000) · Social Text · doi:10.1215/01642472-18-2_63-33 · Cited by 1,749 · cited 1× · see citing works
“However, many others clearly do not see it this way, as is evidenced by those upset with LinkedIn, or in other examples, such as AOL’s struggles with volunteer labor and (non-)payment (see Postigo, 2003 and Terranova, 2000).”
BackgroundEmerging Sources of Labor on the Internet: The Case of America Online Volunteers
Postigo, H. (2003) · International Review of Social History · doi:10.1017/s0020859003001329 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Platform capitalism: The intermediation and capitalisation of digital economic circulation
Langley, P., & Leyshon, A. (2017) · Finance and Society · doi:10.2218/finsoc.v3i1.1936 · Cited by 989 · see citing works
Social media definition and the governance challenge: An introduction to the special issue
Obar, J. A., & Wildman, S. (2015) · Telecommunications Policy · doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2015.07.014 · Cited by 650 · see citing works
Sharing Versus Pseudo-Sharing in Web 2.0
Belk, R. (2014) · The Anthropologist · doi:10.1080/09720073.2014.11891518 · Cited by 622 · see citing works
Mpungose, C. B. (2020) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-020-00603-x · Cited by 415 · see citing works
Contesting epistemic authority: Conspiracy theories on the boundaries of science
Harambam, J., & Aupers, S. (2015) · Public Understanding of Science · doi:10.1177/0963662514559891 · Cited by 328 · see citing works
Fuchs, C. (2012) · tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society · doi:10.31269/triplec.v10i2.443 · Cited by 212 · see citing works
Profit and Gift in the Digital Economy
Elder-Vass, D. (2016) · Cambridge University Press · doi:10.1017/cbo9781316536421 · Cited by 133 · see citing works
THE TREND OF CLASS, RACE, AND ETHNICITY IN SOCIAL MEDIA INEQUALITY: Who still cannot afford to blog?
Schradie, J. (2012) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2012.665939 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Sovacool, B. K., Hook, A., Sareen, S., & Geels, F. W. (2021) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102272 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Resisting media marginalisation: Black women’s digital content and collectivity
Sobande, F., Fearfull, A., & Brownlie, D. (2020) · Consumption Markets & Culture · doi:10.1080/10253866.2019.1571491 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
“Following on from that is reflection on the notions of digital re-embodiment (Belk 2013) and blurred boundaries between online media production and consumption (prosumption) (Ritzer and Jurgenson 2010).”
BackgroundInfluentialBerg, S., & Hofmann, J. (2021) · Internet Policy Review · doi:10.14763/2021.4.1612 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Organizations and their consumers: Bridging work and consumption
Gabriel, Y., Korczynski, M., & Rieder, K. (2015) · Organization · doi:10.1177/1350508415586040 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
The illusion of the digital commons: 'False consciousness' in online alternative economies
Ossewaarde, M., & Reijers, W. (2017) · Organization · doi:10.1177/1350508417713217 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
Uncompensated emotional labor, racial battle fatigue, and (in)civility in digital spaces
Williams, A. A., Bryant, Z., & Carvell, C. (2019) · Sociology Compass · doi:10.1111/soc4.12658 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Woods, J., & Ludvigsen, J. A. L. (2022) · Sport in Society · doi:10.1080/17430437.2021.1904902 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Monetizing serious leisure: A grounded study of fashion blogshops
Lim, R. (2020) · Journal of Leisure Research · doi:10.1080/00222216.2019.1633234 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Classic Communication Theories in the Digital Realm: A Literature Review
Tasente, T. (2026) · Mediaciones Sociales · doi:10.5209/meso.104881
“In social media contexts, users do not merely consume content but also produce, curate, and circulate it, embodying the role of the “prosumer” (Toffler, 1980; Ritzer & Jurgenson, 2010) - a hybrid position that blurs the traditional distinction between producers and audiences.”
- Authors
- Ritzer, G., & Jurgenson, N.
- Affiliations
- University of Maryland, College Park (US)
- Corresponding author
- Ritzer, George
- Jurgenson, Nathan
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Culture
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2010-03
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 13-36
- ISSN
- 1469-5405 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-2900
- OpenAlex
- W2116339082
- Cited by
- 2,075
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 89 · 2025: 91 · 2024: 87 · 2023: 130 · 2022: 116 · 2021: 152 · 2020: 190 · 2019: 148 · 2018: 187 · 2017: 162 · 2016: 165 · 2015: 170 · 2014: 125 · 2013: 128 · 2012: 81
- FWCI
- 269.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Consumer Culture (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Economy and Marxism
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Economy and Work Transformation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Service and Product Innovation
- Keywords
- prosumption, consumer capitalism, user-generated content, unpaid work, exploitation, abundance, scarcity
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
