Renata Frade interviews Carlos A. Scolari, an eminent media theorist focused on digital interfaces, media ecology /evolution and interactive communication. Read to understand how "transmedia" might be going the way of "multimedia," how contemporary media is evolving, and to learn more about major research projects on teenage media engagement and platform labor in Spain.
If you need to develop projects involving education, literacy, engagement strategies and interaction with technology and digital platforms, you will invariably find our interviewee in search engines. If you are in the academic world, you will certainly find countless citations of his work in scholarship from around the world, the result of 40 years of a consistent and innovative career in studies of communication, transmedia, media ecology, interaction design and digital platforms.
Carlos A. Scolari has a Ph.D. in Applied Linguistics and Communication Languages (Catholic University of Milan, Italy) and a Degree in Social Communication (University of Rosario, Argentina). He is Full Professor at the Department of Communication of the University Pompeu Fabra - Barcelona, where he coordinated the PhD Program of Communication between 2018-23. He's lectured about digital interfaces, media ecology /evolution and interactive communication in more than 30 European, Asian and American countries. He's been the Principal Investigator of H2020 TRANSLITERACY (2015-18) and the Spanish projects TRANSALFABETISMOS (2015-18), PLATCOM (2020-23) and LITERAC_IA (2024-27).
His most important publications are: Hacer Clic (2004), Hipermediaciones (2008), El fin de los medios masivos (with M. Carlón, 2009/2019), Crossmedia Innovations (with I. Ibrus, 2012), Narrativas Transmedia (2013), Transmedia Archaeology (with P. Bertetti and M. Freeman), Ecología de los medios (2015), Las leyes de la interfaz (2018), Media Evolution (with F. Rapa, 2019), Cultura Snack (2020), La guerra de las plataformas (2022) and On the Evolution of Media (2023).
In this interview with Dr. Carlos A. Scolari, we reviewed his thinking on current challenges in communication and technology, referring to some of the world's leading experts on engagement studies, fandom, and communication systems, such as Dr. Henry Jenkins. This is a unique opportunity to discuss the present and future of transmedia, new paradigms in storytelling strategies, new contexts for interactions and communication literacy with artificial intelligence, as well as some case studies of projects he has developed.
In Imagining Transmedia (2024), a book recently published by MIT Press that was the subject of some publications on Pop Junctions, Henry Jenkins asks: “How could we have a stable or even coherent definition of ´transmedia´, given the fact that we are discussing emerging and evolving practices within a media landscape that is itself always being reconfigured?”. He states: “All media produced today follows a transmedia logic, loosely speaking, but I used ´transmedia´ to narrowly refer to an intentional, coordinated strategy for spreading story elements across multiple media platforms”.
I agree with the observation that nearly all contemporary communication strategies — be they commercial, political, or cultural — are executed across multiple media and platforms and actively invite audience participation. In essence, these are transmedia strategies. However, I suspect that the term ‘transmedia’ is losing its prominence, particularly within professional circles, due to the ubiquity of transmedia practices. When transmedia becomes the norm, the term ceases to serve as a distinguishing characteristic for businesses or professionals. In this sense, the descriptor ‘transmedia’ no longer carries differentiating power.
As I stated in an article titled “Transmedia Is Dead. Long Live Transmedia! (Or Life, Passion and the Decline of a Concept)”, a parallel can be drawn with the trajectory of the term ‘multimedia’ in the 1990s. Reflecting on my own experience, I was then living in Italy and working at Ars Media, a company specializing in ‘multimedia’ communication. Early in the decade, the term ‘multimedia’ was reserved for a niche group of companies producing digital works, such as CD-ROMs or laser discs, and thus functioned as a marker of differentiation. By the decade’s end, however, the proliferation of multimedia content across the web and digital supports rendered the term obsolete as a competitive advantage. ‘Transmedia,’ I believe, is undergoing a similar lifecycle.
Regarding its definition, ‘transmedia’ appears to have achieved a relatively stable understanding within academic circles. However, as with any concept, it remains subject to tensions and reinterpretations, particularly in light of the rapid evolution of the media ecosystem.
If the concept of ‘transmedia’ follows the same path as ‘multimedia’ years ago, media companies (from the big corporations to the individual production units) will look for new concepts to differentiate what they offer and gain visibility in the market. New concepts like ‘immersive narrative’ or ‘narrative experience’ – in the line of ‘user experience’ or ‘UX’ – could be possible substitutes in the highly competitive media production market.
Exactly. In recent years, there’s been a lot of buzz around ‘immersive narratives,’ a concept I find fascinating because it shifts how we think about storytelling. Instead of the traditional linear approach—like the structures proposed by Aristotle, Propp, or Campbell—it encourages us to think in terms of ‘worlds.’ These are spaces filled with characters, relationships, and plots—a dynamic place where things happen. Researchers like Marie-Laure Ryan, Susana Pajares Tosca, and Lisbeth Klastrup have explored this territorial aspect of narrative in depth.
When I talk about ‘immersive narratives,’ I’m not just referring to the metaverse or VR headsets. It’s about a cohesive set of media where users step in, interact, and essentially live alongside the characters. This shift from the linearity of traditional storytelling to the three-dimensionality of world-building is a game-changer. For one, it provides richer perspectives for analyzing these experiences. And for another, it opens up new possibilities for creativity and production. Writing a script for a linear story is entirely different from creating a narrative world—it’s a whole new level of complexity and opportunity.
The concept of ‘narrative experience’ draws a direct connection to the design of ‘user experience,’ creating a fascinating and valuable crossover, particularly for professionals. Thinking of the creation of ‘transmedia’ or ‘immersive’ narrative worlds as a form of design opens up exciting possibilities. Just as architects design museums and urban planners create parks, why shouldn't we have designers dedicated to crafting narrative worlds?
In some universities, especially within communication programs, transmedia workshops are already part of the final-year curriculum. These workshops integrate and apply the various languages and media that students have learned throughout their studies. Adding a layer of design culture—or even incorporating design thinking—into these workshops could enrich the learning process and prepare students to approach narrative world-building with a more structured and innovative mindset.
You wrote that in academic and scientific circuits the situation is different: the life cycle of concepts is longer than in professional markets. Although in social sciences there are fashionable concepts, such as ‘sign’ or ‘structure’ in the 1960s, ‘text’ and ‘discourse’ in the 1980s, etc.), the concept of ‘transmedia,’ like ‘hypertext,’ or ‘multimedia’ should last longer than in professional circuits.
The academic world, like any other cultural sphere, follows trends and shifting research agendas. Just take a look at Google Ngram, and you’ll see how research topics and key concepts change over time. That said, I think terms like ‘transmedia’ or even ‘multimedia’ still hold their analytical value in academic discussions, regardless of trends. Despite the waning of professional hype, these terms provide a framework for understanding specific logics of communication. It would not be surprising to see doctoral dissertations on ‘transmedia storytelling’ being written decades from now, much as concepts like ‘hypertext’—not entirely new—continue to serve as viable analytical categories. Just last week, an excellent doctoral thesis on ‘transmedia tourism’ was defended in our department, showcasing the enduring relevance and adaptability of these frameworks.
Henry Jenkins and you have recently dedicated time to developing projects related to transmedia or civic media/civic imagination due to the strength of using storytelling for social causes, activism, and educational actions. For you, are there still theoretical and project horizons for transmedia? If so, what are the paths or trends? I personally believe so, including in a corporate and institutional environment, beyond the civic, or activist, or related to social causes. Technology does not determine cultures and societies, at least for now, I hope that AI does not change that.
A decade ago, we began exploring the concept of ‘transmedia literacy,’ aiming to adapt the logic of transmedia narratives—stories told across multiple media with audience collaboration, now involving prosumers—to the educational context. Our focus was on understanding how young people learn outside traditional school environments, in informal settings like social networks or video games. At the same time, we sought ways to bring this learning into the classroom, integrating it into the school curriculum. The H2020 TRANSLITERACY project (2014–2018) gave us the opportunity to work in eight countries, advancing our understanding of these dynamics.
Can you talk about this project and main outputs? Could you describe what types of transmedia storytelling strategies are most effective for educators?
The H2020 TRANSLITERACY project was a cutting-edge initiative designed to bridge gaps in digital and transmedia education, particularly for younger generations immersed in complex media ecosystems. Aimed at shifting from traditional media literacy to the broader concept of transmedia literacy, the project emphasized understanding and engaging with the multiple platforms teens navigate daily. In this project, we did not approach young people as victims of the media, as traditional media literacy often did. Instead, we see them as active agents who are learning—however and wherever they can—to navigate a complex and hyper-technological environment. I completely agree with the way dana boyd summed up this landscape: “It’s complicated.” And any oversimplification of complexity is dangerous. For example, believing that banning a smartphone or a single app will magically solve the challenges of adolescence.
Another cornerstone of TRANSLITERACY was its bottom-up methodology. By analyzing the everyday practices of teens—from writing fan fiction to modding video games—the project uncovered informal learning processes often overlooked by traditional education systems. Beyond its scientific contributions—such as creating one of the most comprehensive maps of the skills teens develop outside of school—the project also produced a practical framework and a series of activities to help educators integrate these transmedia skills into formal education. This approach not only bridges the gap between informal and formal learning but also empowers educators to connect with students on their own digital and creative terms.
TRANSLITERACY PROJECT
The concept of ‘transmedia literacy’ is also present in some of your other projects.
Building on the same methodological and epistemological foundations of TRANSLITERACY, we later examined informal learning processes in the context of platform workers through the PLATCOM project, which concluded earlier this year. In this case, we did not work with adolescents but with platform workers over the age of 18. However, we also explored the competencies they develop and the informal learning processes involved. More recently, with María del Mar Guerrero-Pico we launched a new project called LITERAC_IA, which revisits the concept of ‘transmedia literacy.’ This time, our research focuses on how teenagers are engaging with Generative Artificial Intelligences and the ways they are learning to use these tools.
PLATCOM PROJECT
As shown, the concept of 'transmedia'—in this case, 'transmedia literacy'—continues to provide a valuable framework for various research projects that share common elements. Our focus is on informal, ‘wild’ learning that occurs outside traditional educational institutions, often within highly technological and interactive environments like digital platforms. We are particularly interested in how these practices can be identified, adapted, and incorporated into formal education settings.
As I already said, when working with adolescents, we make it a point to reject the notion of them as passive victims of the media—a perspective that has dominated traditional media literacy for years. This marks a key distinction between our approach and more conventional views. While we strongly advocate for the critical and ethical use of digital technologies, we firmly oppose the narrative that positions every teen or adult person as inherently vulnerable and defenseless to media influence.
Back to the use of ‘transmedia’ in other fields, just as our team continues to work under the umbrella of ‘transmedia literacy,’ other researchers can pursue their studies within similar frameworks. Long live transmedia!
There are digital platforms whose information literacy is not dominated by the public, others that will soon exist following consumption and behavior trends, this has always existed. But what I really believe is that there is still a lack of strategic, innovative, and intelligent vision in storytelling projects that incorporate much of what prosumers produce. What do you think about it?
The media industry is always eager to encourage audience or user participation, yet it often struggles to meaningfully integrate that content into its ecosystem. It's no surprise that most fanfiction or user-generated content ends up on platforms like Wattpad, social media, or wiki pages. The media industry's DNA still reflects its broadcasting roots, when audiences were treated as mere numbers rather than collaborators.
The most compelling examples of participation, however, often emerge in non-fiction transmedia projects. Documentaries or civic engagement initiatives, for instance, genuinely incorporate audience contributions, allowing their productions to deeply shape and inform the narrative. A transmedia project like QUIPU from Perú or MUJERES EN VENTA from Argentina would be unimaginable without the participation of Peruvian or Argentinian women sharing their stories. In contrast, the Marvel universe could easily continue thriving without integrating the fanfiction that has grown around it. It probably wouldn't be the same, but it would still exist. This highlights a key difference in how participation can be valued and utilized depending on the context.
Very soon quantum computing will reach domestic use, a new communication paradigm for transmitting, emitting, and receiving information in millions of data points at the speed of light. Human data capture and processing capacity is not enough. And from it, with AI, platforms will certainly emerge that will influence relationships between people. Based on this, what are the challenges for storytelling in this scenario that is increasingly approaching? What, in your opinion, would be a storytelling strategy for the new generations that represents them and makes sense?
If we consider narrative models, I doubt we’ll see any major changes—just as there haven’t been over the past millennia. Certain narrative structures have endured for thousands of years, and it’s hard to imagine radical transformative shifts. What is changing, however, are the ways these narratives are expressed and the social practices that activate, disseminate, and amplify them. The integration of generative AI offers intriguing opportunities for exploring the creation of new narrative worlds. Early experiments, beyond deepfake videos, are venturing into dreamlike and surreal territories, shaped by AI's inherent hallucinations and errors. On the video game front, procedural generation is another key trend. While not entirely new—it was applied in games from Tetris (1985) to No Man’s Sky (2016) —it transformed gaming by cutting costs and unlocking new creative possibilities for virtual environments. Yet, much remains to be explored, and it’s too early to propose detailed scenarios for the future. Reality, as always, will surprise us—for better or worse.
Other topics, such as the capture and processing of human data or the use of platforms for surveillance, clearly lie outside the realm of narrative. If there’s one thing we’ve learned from studying the evolution of the media ecosystem—and socio-technological networks in general—it’s that long-term predictions are nearly impossible. At best, we can aim to envision scenarios, which are often highly diverse, within the short term. But, as I mentioned earlier, reality always manages to surprise us in the end.
Still on the challenges of digital platforms mentioned in the questions above, there are others that are already imposed in our increasingly algorithmic society in which data storage and exchange does not occur in a transparent and secure way. In Algorithms of Resistance, Bonini & Treré (2024) state that “platform power is thus inseparable from the ability of individuals to exert some sort of agency and resistance over it”. During 2020 and 2024, your research group developed the PLATCOM project. Could you talk about the main contributions of this project? Do you believe that those involved are aware of how much the algorithm influences their work and lives?
For four years, we conducted research on platform labor in Spain. Our focus was not on content creation but rather on the most vulnerable workers in this ecosystem—those engaged in ‘last mile’ tasks such as elder or pet care, delivery services, or driving. This is an incredibly complex landscape, one that cannot be reduced solely to the dynamics of oppression and resistance (although these dynamics undeniably exist). In the Spanish context, a significant portion of these workers avoid union organizations or collective resistance actions. Perhaps the high number of undocumented immigrants working in the sector or the perception of it as a transient and temporary activity reinforces this attitude.
Our fieldwork uncovered some fascinating insights. For instance, we encountered workers who, during the same interview, praised the ‘freedom’ that the platform system afforded them—for example, the ability to work without a boss and to manage their schedules autonomously—while simultaneously criticizing the platforms for employing ‘slave-like’ exploitative practices. In this context, we developed a concept: slaverty (esclavertad), encapsulating this paradox. This term reflects just one of the many contradictory and conflict-laden aspects that emerged from our study.
One thing became clear to us: platforms cannot be analyzed solely through the lens of algorithms or the ruthless use of personal data. If we limit our analysis to that dimension, we miss much of the picture. To illustrate, let me draw a historical comparison. Television was a hegemonic medium for several generations, and its business model was built on a quantitative system—ratings—that determined the cost per second of advertising spots. That model shaped the content being produced and intensified the competition among different media. The question is: Can we reduce television to that quantitative dimension alone, to the temporal exploitation of attention for monetization through advertising? Clearly not. Beyond its business model, television transformed how millions of people perceived themselves and their understanding of the world; it exported the American Way of Life but also helped rural-to-urban migrants in Latin America understand urban living. Just as we cannot impoverish the analysis of television by reducing it to ratings, we must not impoverish the analysis of platforms by reducing them to algorithms. A significant portion of our social lives is constructed and unfolds on platforms. Things happen on platforms—many things—beyond the inevitable and problematic algorithmic dimension.
According to your recent book (On the Evolution of Media, 2023), “Media Evolution is a proto-discipline that studies media change from a long-term, holistic, intermedia, reticular, and complex point of view. The goal of this proto-discipline is not to predict the future of the media ecosystem but rather to understand its past and contemporary transformations.” Could you elaborate on how you perceive the main contributions of this perspective?
Media Evolution examines how mediated communication evolves over time, focusing on the dynamic interplay between media and their reciprocal processes across different historical and cultural contexts. Drawing on biological concepts like ‘emergence,’ ‘adaptation,’ ‘survival,’ or ‘extinction,’ it provides a framework for understanding how media grow, compete, and integrate within a dynamic ecosystem. Central to this perspective are ideas such as ‘coevolution’ and‘intermediality,’ which highlight the mutual influences between emerging and traditional media. This approach moves beyond linear historical narratives, presenting media landscapes as interconnected, evolving networks.
But why the need for a new theory or research field? Is Media History or Archaeology insufficient? Unlike Media History, which focuses on chronological developments, Media Evolution emphasizes intermediality by uncovering systemic patterns and identifying adaptive strategies within media ecosystems. Let me explain. History of communication books often tell us that clay tablets came first, followed by papyrus scrolls, then manuscript books on parchment, and finally, in the 15th century, the printed book. However, what they rarely discuss is what happened to papyrus after parchment became widespread, or how manuscript books managed to survive after the invention of Gutenberg’s press. The same gaps appear when discussing the 20th century: How did cinema change with the emergence of television or video games? How did radio adapt after the rise of television? This is what Media Evolution seeks to address. Media Archaeology, for its part, delves into specific devices and practices, often avoiding broad theoretical frameworks. Together, these approaches are complementary: Media History outlines general timelines, Media Archaeology uncovers forgotten devices and practices, and Media Evolution provides a broad framework for understanding the long-term dynamics of media change.
Links
PLATCOM Project: https://platcom.upf.edu/
Transmedia Literacy: https://transmedialiteracy.org/
Teacher’s Kit: https://transmedialiteracy.upf.edu/es/transmedia-skills-map
References
Bonini, T., & Treré, E. (2024). Algorithms of resistance: the everyday fight against platform power. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Jenkins, H. (2024). “Foreword: What We Mean by “Transmedia”. In: Finn, E. Imagining transmedia. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Scolari, C.A. (2018). Transmedia literacy in the new media ecology. White Paper of the H2020 TRANSLITERACY project. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
Scolari, C.A. (2019). Transmedia Is Dead. Long Live Transmedia! (Or Life, Passion and the Decline of a Concept). Letra. Imagen. Sonido: Ciudad Mediatizada, ISSN 1851-8931, Nº. 20, 2019, Pags. 69-92.
Scolari, C.A. (2023). On the Evolution of Media. London: Routledge (Spanish edition: Sobre la evolución de los medios,Ampersand, 2024).
Scolari, C.A., Piña, M. and Guerrero-Pico, M. (2024). Communication platforms, workforce and informal learning. White Paper of the PLATCOM project. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
Biography
Renata Frade is a tech feminism PhD candidate at the Universidade de Aveiro (DigiMedia/DeCa). Cátedra Oscar Sala/ Instituto de Estudos Avançados/Universidade de São Paulo Artificial Intelligence researcher. Journalist (B.A. in Social Communication from PUC-Rio University) and M.A. in Literature from UERJ. Henry Jenkins´ transmedia alumni and attendee at M.I.T., Rede Globo TV and Nave school events/courses. Speaker, activist, community manager, professor and content producer on women in tech, diversity, inclusion and transmedia since 2010 (such as Gartner international symposium, Girls in Tech Brazil, Mídia Ninja, Digitalks, MobileTime etc). Published in 13 academic and fiction books (poetry and short stories). Renata Frade is interested in Literature, Activism, Feminism, Civic Imagination, Technology, Digital Humanities, Ciberculture, HCI.
