Digital gaming and digital technologies have their own unique cultural history while at the same time, the cultural heritage of digital technology is emerging. Digital technology has been understood as merely an apparatus that can be utilized for transferring nondigital historical content to novel digital products. These products, including types such as multimedia shows, games, Web sites, and online course environments, are targeted at juvenile audiences, who are typically considered to be the primary users of such new media forms. For decades, the changes and new continuities in both mediated content and the technology of mediation were mostly hidden in the shadow of educational goal-attainment. This article draws inspiration from ideas on media archaeology and the cultures of history. In this article we suggest an approach of internal and external cultural heritage of games cultures. We introduce a four-fold table regarding the relationship between cultural heritage (or history) and digital technology. The four-fold table consists of the dimension of a researcher's comprehensive/applied goal-attainment and the dimension of the internality/externality of history and cultural heritage in regard to the digital game cultural context. Within these cultures, there are several alternative ways of discussing the relationship between history, cultural heritage, and digital technology, separate from the traditional edutainment perspective. The dimensions are illustrated with practical examples, including a typologization of historiographical computer games, retrogaming, and educational workshops on game classics. ACM Reference Format:Suominen, J. and Sivula, A. 2013. Gaming legacy? Four approaches to the relation between cultural heritage and digital technology. ACM J.

Histories are used and produced for several reasons and purposes. History culture consists of the entirety of generations, modifications, transformations and utilisations of the images of the past. This article is concerned with corporate history culture that is manifested in commissioned company histories and other representations of company history.History culture is always oriented to the future. Corporate history culture developed out of the demand in companies, not within universities. I clarify, in the light of a microhistorical case of Porin Puuvilla Oy, how and why different actors select one past to be historicised and leave another to be obsolete.I open my contribution with an introduction to the concepts and practices of corporate history culture and history management. Then I move on to the case study and analyse the way that practice and representations of corporate history culture changed between 1948 and 1973. As my methodological contribution, I introduce the analytical four-field of the internal and external dimensions of history management. I conclude the article with a discussion of the corporate history culture in the context of the concepts of retro and nostalgia.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract