Yesterday, I was listening to NPR. They were interviewing Andrew Keen. He was discussing his new book "The Cult of the Amateur." As I understand it, the book attacks Web 2.o (mentioned specifically), blogging and wikis as undermining professional journalism and communication in general. It is creating an "Internet cult" of amateurs who are publishing their own news stories.
You can listen to the interview at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11131872
I found it very interesting given the discussion in class and Richardson's book. One of the points Keen makes is that by opening up communications to everyone, all we have is amateur communication - which is not governed by any principles, guidelines or sense of professionalism..
He referred to newspapers and encyclopedias as "road kill" on the information highway. He indicated that all we are really left with is a bunch of people presenting their own opinions on blogs and wikis.
As I listened to this interview, a few things popped into my mind: Dan Rather's story about Bush and the bloggers who discovered the "yellow journalism" at CBS and the constant accusations by the right and left regarding the biased media.
Humm. I'm so glad that all of the news media is unbiased and doesn't include any one's personal opinion.
7 comments:
Thanks for the information about the NPR article. So, is participatory remix culture thievery? I don't think so. Keen makes a strong argument for the need to protect property rights in the read/write Web 2.0; but, I think he is mistaken about the "ripping apart the fabric of our culture." (He was in San Francisco for during the interview, and you never know what might be the couture of the day - perhaps paper towels).
The record companies bottom lines are not suffering, so I suspect that the industry is talking out of both sides....
I'm sending my copyright paperwork off to Washington for my newest copyright - "Keen's views." I guess once it is granted, he won't be able to publish them anymore. Ha!
You know, some of what Keen is saying is valid and I have thought about those very issues myself. I'll start with my opinion about the "internet cult" of amateurs--there are indeed so many voices just babbling away in the wind, but eventually people will start to sort out the reliable, factual voices, and those sources will do what it takes to keep their ethics straight--I mean, even the so-called professionals have their moral weak spots--after all, the bottom lines is that they answer to their sponsors more than anyone else. See Herman and Chomsky for their famous argument: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6435.htm
Btw, nice post Steve.
Thanks for sharing the interview, and you should share it in class this week for those that didn't get a chance to read your blog.
Very insightful. I think Keen is a little over the top, but he does bring up issues of the read/write web. For me, I see this 2.0 as a revolution. Everyman's voice needs to be heard - let the audience filter and respond.
I agree with Joe and Marc, we need to hope that the society of internet users will filter the pertinent and usable information and disregard the rest. I guess it's left up to us teachers to continue to mold our students to be effective users of internet information. ;-)
Cheryl H
Thank you for sharing the interview. I think that there is a ton of information out there and you must decide what you want to keep and what you want to toss.
I have enjoyed working with you....best wishes as you continue your journey.
Post a Comment