Me, ‘Person of the Year’? No thanks

< Prev | 1 | 2

MSN Tech and Gadgets

Cool new cell phones coming this fall

The Time article describes this "Web 2.0" phenomenon as a "revolution." Let’s be very careful about that term. First of all, a real revolution would be a radical rupture in the flow of history. I would submit that what we now call "user-generated content" has always been a major part of the American media diet.

Take a look at a copy from 1910 of the Daily Forward, the newspaper for immigrant New York Jews, and you will find a major portion of it devoted to letters from its community of readers. People wrote in asking for advice. Others responded with advice. The Forward, like all community newspapers back when community newspapers mattered, made itself essential by facilitating public deliberation and giving voice to the voiceless.

Now, to keep even that phenomenon in perspective, it’s important to realize that today’s Web grants all of us who are wealthy enough to afford one of these computer gizmos and a subscription to enough bandwidth the ability to both broadcast and narrowcast even the most mundane and irrelevant of expressions. So we do. The Forward, of course, carefully selected its published letters and responses. Not everyone who wanted a voice got one.

Story continues below ↓

And ever since the rise of radio producers realized the value of the "real," the authentic, and the common. Audiences love to hear or see people whom are no more talented or important than they are. It’s comforting to know that with a little luck someone might care what I think.

It’s part of a slippery slope between true democratic culture and crass commercial culture. Because we all matter equally in the polis we pretend we all might matter equally in the public square. Granting that illusory wish can be very profitable.

So what’s truly revolutionary about the current communicative moment is part of a 20-year process of the steady proliferation of digitization and networking in the hands of millions of people. It’s not about a handful of sites that make such connections easier and cheaper. Those are valuable changes. But they are not revolutionary in and of themselves.

The results of this revolution (Of the late-20^th and early 21^st centuries — not of 2006) are hard to gauge. I tend to see them as substantially positive. More people have a chance to be heard on matters of public concern. And more artists and songwriters have a chance to find audiences without selling out to bullying corporations. And as consumers, we have a better chance of avoiding exorbitant prices for goods when the Web links us to more competing vendors than our local main street markets (or Wal-Mart) used to offer.

But we should not be blind to the costs as well. While we find it easier to "link" to "friends" thousands of miles away because they also appreciate the musical stylings of Coldplay, we spend less time in the presence of our neighbors — the folks who would come knocking (we hope) when they notice those community newspapers (that we probably no longer get) piling up on our doorstep.

As sociologist Eric Klinenberg explains in his brilliant new book Fighting for Air: The Battle to Control America’s Media, media concentration remains a formidable problem. Not long ago, in times of need, we could rely on our local radio stations and newspapers to help us deal with dangers and help our neighbors. No more. The lack of local, community-based communication (thanks to more automated radio stations and consultant-driven playlists) endangers us all, especially during times of crisis and disaster.

User-generated content, whether via low-power radio or community blogs, only goes so far to fill the void. And if the subject of that content is "you," instead of "us," we gain nothing from the new medium.

We do ourselves a major disservice when we exaggerate the revolutionary power of ourselves as individuals. Narcissism may be good marketing. But it’s not good for humanity.

Siva Vaidhyanathan is an associate professor of Culture and Communication at New York University. His latest book is The Anarchist in the Library: How the Clash Between Freedom and Control is Hacking the Real World and Crashing the System (Basic Books, 2004). He blogs at Sivacracy.net.

< Prev | 1 | 2

Discuss Story On Newsvine
Rate Story:
View popularLowHigh
Email
Instant Message
Print