1. How does Keen define Democratized media, and what are his main issues with this trend? use examples from the web in the form of links. Include this idea of "disintermediation".
Keen describes a democratized media as less cultured, less reliable news and a chaos of useless information. These main issues affect the way the web functions by replacing business with an abundance of media. Keen highlights the music industry by discussing how illegal downloading music has weakened record sales. This is just one example of how the democratized media has left several mainstream businesses in ruins. Keen sees Web 2.0 as an overwhelming excess of information that has set us back as a society.
The Morningside Post (http://themorningsidepost.com/tmp-conference-2011/) discussed the effects of a democratized media from a more liberal perspective. They addressed the fact that anyone has the ability to take on the role of a journalist using Web 2.0 features. They discuss citizen journalism from both points of view and how it has allowed our media to grow. Just as Keen, they are afraid that citizen journalism takes the fact checking out of media. In terms of “disintermediation,” it is based around the idea of removing the middleman. It relates to the issues brought up in Keen’s book as well as the fundamental concerns of democratized media. It sees business in a democratized media as one that deals directly with consumers. In such a scenario, traditional retail is removed and sells faster and cheaper to customers. A democratized media has a revolutionary impact on business and the economy by allowing internet-based businesses to thrive while retail companies suffer significantly.
2. Compare and Contrast Keens take on Social Media with Douglas Rushkoff's. What are these differences in opinion? Which one speaks to you and your own experiences and why? You may include the ideas of such utopian technophiles as Larry Lessig, Chris anderson, and Jimmy Wales (who are these guys!?)
Andrew Keen and Douglas Rushkoff’s opinions on the current state of the Social Media are fundamentally different because of their attitudes towards many key issues. Keen prefers to look at these issues from a conservative perspective while Rushkoff is definitely more liberal about the many changes that have occurred. Keen believes that social media negatively affects business and disrupts the status quo. While Keen feels that less is more, Rushkoff weights the potential good and the risk that these strides can have on our society. Rushkoff agrees with Keen in terms of his hesitation to buy into the new social media. In the end of Digital Nation, I felt as though realizes that Web 2.0 has the potential to move us forward as a society in ways that the traditional media never could. I feel as though the current state of social media accurately reflects the current state of the world. We live in a society where technology and knowledge are at an all time high. I believe Web 2.0 and the society in which we live go hand-in-hand and coexist well.
No comments:
Post a Comment