Enrique Gili is a freelance writer covering Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability (Apparently quite a few people are distressed at the explosion of information out there. The arguement that information should be controlled by gatekeepers has been going on since the Middle Ages when monks discovered they no longer cornered the market on publishing illustrated manuscripts, and books ( God forbid) in general might contain dangerous ideas.
The blogosphere is no exception. Leading the anti-blogosphere charge is Andrew Keen author of the broadside, The Cult of the Amateur, with the no-messing-about subtitle "How Today's Internet is Killing Our Culture and Assaulting Our Economy."
The main thrust of his argument is that all this home-made content - blogs, podcasts, amateur videos and music - is an inadequate replacement for mainstream media. It may be a harmless, even occasionally enriching addition, but we can't have both, because the former is swiftly killing off the latter. ( Guardian Unlimited)
Email this entry to a friend
View the Technorati Link Cosmos for this entry
Comments
Um, why can't we have both? Radio didn't kill books, TV didn't kill radio, I don't see why the internet will kill any of those media formats. I seriously don't think we'll ever pay to watch you tube stuff at movie theaters, either.
Posted by: writerdd | July 24, 2007 06:17 PM
I think that there is room for both mainstream media and user created content. You always had to filter the things you want to read, but now with the exponential increase in the amount of web sites and blogs it�s even more challenging.
Sure, there�s a lot of low level material out there, but I believe it wasn�t that bad if people would actually create some original content.
I�m afraid the main blog related problem today is the copy-and-paste trend where one post on a popular site immediately spawns many copies all over the blogosphere. I see many blogs that are just copy-and-paste posts and embedded movies from YouTube.
Posted by: Uri | July 24, 2007 06:22 PM
Blogs are obviously filling a need. Mass media are welcome to try and fill it, if they can.
Mass media has little to worry about, or to brag about.
Posted by: decrepitoldfool | July 24, 2007 07:01 PM
Basically, he seems to be complaining that if everyone watches "homebrew" movies on YouTube™, nobody will bother to fund another "Battlefield Earth", and if everyone is listening to puny independent musicians, Britney Spears will starve. Or something.
Mainstream media is vital to our culture, just like cheap white bread, "Miracle Whip", and "Kraft Singles" pasteurized process cheese food product...and we wouldn't want THAT replaced by amateur cooks, would we?!?!?
Posted by: SMC | July 24, 2007 09:01 PM
It certainly seems as though technological advancements and media convergence always leave someone with a bad taste in their mouth.
I love reading, but I also love listening to my books on CD in the car on the way to work... and I still buy the books!
Posted by: Will | July 24, 2007 09:55 PM
I remember when VCRs were about to destroy cinema, synthesisers were about to destroy acoustic musical instruments, and the internet was about to destroy all human contact.
Now we've got cinema multiplexes, the latest synths recreating all the ideosyncrasies of mechanical instruments, and chatrooms.
Not that any of this is really the point. The point is not that the "traditional" media Keen defends is better or worse than the "new" media - it's that the traditional outlets are easier to muzzle and manipulate.
Posted by: Kapitano | July 24, 2007 09:55 PM