Web 2.0 is reminiscent of Marx
Andrew Keen pens a smart essay for The Weekly Standard on the cultural changes that may result from Web 2.0’s push for the liberation of the individual through “democratized media”. He contends that the fall of big media doesn’t just mean changes in distribution, it means that the infrastructure necessary to create super artists (Bono, Hitchcock, etc.) goes away. Elite talent, he argues, requires big money and a big (non-fractured) audience.
In the Web 2.0 world, however, the nightmare is not the scarcity, but the over-abundance of authors. Since everyone will use digital media to express themselves, the only decisive act will be to not mark the paper. [...] But one of the unintended consequences of the Web 2.0 future may well be that everyone is an author, while there is no longer any audience.
It’s a well-thought article, worth reading, but unfortunately it’s wrong.
Read on to find out why…
It’s true that superstar artists and universal experiences have traditionally been the product of the media machine — but they exist because humans have a strong desire for common experiences. It’s why millions read Harry Potter, or Boing Boing, or watched the Lazy Sunday video on the net long after SNL aired it. People will always read, listen to, and watch what their friends do. And no matter how many voices there are, some will always have far more listeners than others. (See the A-list blogger brouhaha.) The media machine isn’t the only way to create hierarchy or separate the good stuff from the crap.
You might argue that the written word is an exception, that the most elaborate artistic endeavors (say, big-budget hollywood epics) require infrastructure that only established studios and distributors can provide. But don’t forget, there’s a long history of wealthy patrons to great artistic endeavors. Whether you’re talking about Cosimo Medici commissioning Brunelleschi to finish the spectacularly expensive and controversial dome atop the Santa Maria del Fiore, or Steve Jobs sinking 10 million into an unknown group of tinkerers and geeks that goes on to create the next generation of cinema classics, the principle is the same. Where there is artistic talent, and a chance for making money or gaining power from it, there is money. The media machine isn’t the only way to fund artistic product.
In fact, there’s really no big difference between individual benefactors and big media. Media just formalizes the practice. So as long as established media can continue to provide value that individual sponsors cannot, they’ll exist. If they can’t find themselves a place in the value chain, they die. Either way, it’s clear that we haven’t seen the end of common cultural experience or star power.
Link: Web 2.0: The second generation of the Internet has arrived. It’s worse than you think
(* The title of this post is taken from the re-print of Andrew’s essay on CBS news’ site. A much more attention-grabbing title, to be sure.)
Technorati Tags: citizen journalism, media, art
