Participatory Culture within Kim Kardashian Hollywood

As previously mentioned in the introduction, the main type of participatory culture within KKH is “affiliation”. Affiliation was defined by Henry Jenkins as “Memberships, formal and informal, in online communities centered around various forms of media, such as Friendster, Facebook, MySpace, message boards, metagaming, or game clans” (Jenkins et al p.3). Kim Kardashian Hollywood took over social media feeds when it first came out, and to this day there are tweets by the hour under the hash tag #kimkardashianhollywood.

It can be argued that the ideology surrounding fame is pushed further into our lives via the means of affiliation, “The instruments of social media are well suited to making the existing social order more efficient. They are not a natural enemy of the status quo.” (Cromwell 2010). When browsing through comments by users on Facebook and Twitter, the quest for fame is something discussed regularly. There is even cheat code websites and YouTube videos dedicated to achieving maximum popularity.

Another main feature within the game is the chances to share your rise to fame. Not only does the narrative of the game include the characters’ and fake magazines in the game’s tweets, but also you can tweet to your own account. You can also play with your friends by connecting to Facebook. By connecting to other platforms, you are rewarded by money, followers and energy in the game. It seems if you connect with your real life friends, your online friends increase in turn.

Energy, Money and Follower rewards (own gif)

The key to Kim’s accomplishments with this game is participation. “Organizations regularly solicit not just purchases or opinions, but also participation in innovation, in marketing, and in the creation of lifestyles, cultures, and loyalties” (Kelty 2012, pp. 23 – 24); that being said does this mean that organisations rely on those participating to revel in ideas of fame, and in doing so return to the game to fulfil those ideas? The fan club Twitter account for the game has 12.1k followers and 500k+ monthly Facebook users play the game; with so many users returning across platforms the ideology of fame must be promoted and accepted by those users, and may even be a key to the success. 

“Games create a social context that connects learners to others who share their interests…The act of sharing what we know solidifies our own understanding and also provides a sense of empowerment and expertise.” (Jenkins 2005) 

this being said it is understandable to think that ideology can be solidified through the means of gaming.

One of the more fascinating forms of participatory cultures coming from the game however is YouTube fan made videos. Some of YouTube’s most popular users are fans of Kim K, and have created “play through” videos, which is a form of “expressions”. YouTube’s most subscribed user “pewdiepie” and former most subscribed “smosh” (who specialise in gaming and comedy) have made fan videos about the game, providing those who aren’t fans or users of the game an insight. These videos seem to be light hearted and probably motivated by an obvious growth in audience by talking about a popular topic. They in a way make fun of the aspect of fame in the game, and play the game “ironically”. Is this a form of being avant-garde? Or are they just further pushing the fame stereotype by including those who were to identify as avant-garde and including them in this ideology regardless of the seriousness. In a way this is also a parody, like mentioned earlier.

 On the other hand, there are more serious “walk through” type videos; this is a type of “collaborative problem-solving”.These videos consist of cheats and tricks on how to work your way to top. This in a way can take the fun out of the game, as it is more focused on winning in the game. If these users are ignoring the sense of parody within the game, does that mean they are more focused on the fame aspect? Or simply just the aspect of achievement? It can also be argued therefore that ideology simply does not reach these users. As Barthes claimed earlier that the bourgeoisie is naturalized – this being said does this mean that gamers who aren’t fazed by the fame are revolting as part of the avant-garde. Barthes discussed this in Mythologies, stating, “there are revolts against bourgeois ideology. This is what one generally calls the avant-garde…from a minority group of artists and intellectuals” (Barthes 1972, p. 138). Nonetheless, these people are still interacting with the game across a range of spaces/platforms, and are still in a way interacting with the idea of fame. As a result, it’s clear that anyone involved with the game across platforms are reflecting on fame ideologies.