Andrew Keen and the battle against User Generated Content

Ok before I start, I just want to say I just lost my entire post on this guy by my browser freezing as I went to preview it. So instead the 6500 character one I just lost you get this
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Keen was on a show on CBC on Saturday called Spark
He was debating another writer on the pros and cons of web 2.0. His view is that the new web is dangerous because it puts power into the hands of the people instead of the time honored way of MSM. He called into question 99.9% of the content on the web as useless.

Here's an article by him from early 2006...

www.weeklystandard.com...

This Web 2.0 dream is Socrates's nightmare: technology that arms every citizen with the means to be an opinionated artist or writer.

The consequences of Web 2.0 are inherently dangerous for the vitality of culture and the arts. Its empowering promises play upon that legacy of the '60s

He says that we are akin to Marxists and that we shouldn't have this power to"level the playing field".

Here's his blog

I say that this person goes against everything we stand for here. He calls us all amateurs. Yes maybe we are. But the membership at ATS includes people from very many scientific backgrounds, pilots, engineers,geologists,meteorologists,police, military,DOD contractors,photo experts and so on. I would say the quality of the posts on here can be outstanding and very professional. You may not agree with whats being said but it is presented in a very professional manner. Take the Barksdale thread. If that is so amateur, why all the unique government agency hits just to that thread? And that is just one example.

Alot of us here take the time to check facts, cross check against other sources, email sources for responses. We are not the MSM but thats the point isn't it? We provide another side of the story. Counter-spin in a way. I know there can be some crazy things posted on here but what is wrong with that? We aren't that closed minded to shoot down anything that sounds a little off the wall. If we discover it to be a hoax we say so. We are also quick to point out chronic hoaxers. or unreliable sites. I know everyone here doesn't do these things but with over 100,000 members, can you really expect that?

My question to Mister Keen would be: What does someone need to be considered "professional"?

Weekly Standard is a far-right neoconservative rag. He's just jealous that his magazine's philosophy has failed and ours is succeeding.

Don't forget that former neoconservative darling Francis Fukuyama has given neoconservatism a very public and unequivocal execution.

www.dailykos.com...

This clown wrote a book named "Cult of the Amateur". He made several very debatable arguments in how the internet has killed the music industry, destroying the movie industry, putting newspapers out of business, among other statements about comparing Wiki to real encyclopedias and just plain stupid stuff.

He gives too much credit for blogging and acts as if people really care what bloggers post on the internet. His real point was only college educated, professional people should be the one's blogging with all others just reading.

He has an overwhelming sense of self worth in his opinion while being so proud of his professional education, he can hardly write a paragraph without using the words "amateur, uneducated, untrained" while describing the average person.

His ego is only foreshadowed by his small lexicon to describe the little people. Other than these casual observations by an undereducated amateur with an untrained eye; he's a great author.

reply to post by uberarcanist


I only used the link as it's one of the older articles I found by him. There is lots of more current stuff on him and his book.

reply to post by hinky


That's the image I get of him also. Apparently the only people worthy of writing are academics and pro journalists. The only people capable of producing music is pro musicians. The rest of us have neither the talent or intelligence to do these things.

The Medium Is The Message

Mr. Keen's arguments are hopelessly undermined by two rather glaring flaws:

1. His demonstrably false premise that the same forces which have shaped other forms of media won't influence the Internet or "Web 2.0", and the assumption that "traditional mainstream media" won't be able to adapt or compete. They already are, and already were at the time this notorious article was written.

2. The fact that he's using the very same media whose egalitarianism he's deriding (brought to us via web pages and his own personal blog) to deride them. Not exactly the most convincing platform for expressing Neo-Luddite sentiments.

Inasmuch as they apply to his own status as a self-appointed "elite" pundit, his concerns make a great deal of sense. Forced to endure any sort of competent rebuttal, observations made from such great heights of conceit will inevitably fall apart under the weight of their own self-absorption.

Predictably, commentators like Mr. Keen have much to fear from a level playing field. Without an exclusive infrastructure of centralized control and authority to enforce them, the pretensions of the "chattering classes" lose their luster.

But the grand punchline is how supremely ironic it is that someone with such impeccable conservative credentials could express unbridled contempt for a free market.

I suppose it's a sign of the times we live in.

Perhaps Mr. Keen would feel more comfortable publishing his screeds on hand-pressed papyrus, which is a technology far more contemporary with his views on communication.

File under "elitism", "ash heap of history" and "millions and millions of blogs".

The only people capable of producing music is pro musicians.

as someone in the music industry who comes from an audio engineers standpoint, i say, the only life in the music industry is the 'amateurs'. the professional musicians and the music industry as a whole is more about marketing, less about music.

i would go a step further and say the MSM is also more about marketing and less about what is actually happening in the world.

just because the marketing schemes that the MSM puts out are less effective due to 'everyone and their brother has a blog' means that they have to actually start caring about the stories they put out because thousands of people are ready and able to dispute the 'facts' of their stories.

these bloggers would never even be an issue with the MSM if they were wrong about everything. they provide the perfect checks and balances reporting needs, and the news does not like that. they would rather live in an informational dictatorship were THEY told you what the news is.

I'm going to use some explicit words, I'm sorry, but these tools deserve it.

This guy thinks the internet destroyed mainstream industry? This guy believes that music, film, and the arts have been undermined by the internet? No, that's not his agenda. That's not what he means. He's simply angsty over the fact that mainstream industry is no longer getting the attention it once (back in the 70's) deserved. Face it. Mainstream today has nothing to do with complexity and sophistication - it's all about how watered down your crap can get. The easier it is to sell en masse, the better. The dumber it is, the better.

The most effected and the easiest to point out:

Music.

Every single goddamn thing you hear that's mainstream is #ty pop. It's straight garbage. People are getting piss tired of that crap, its been far too long. It started in the 80's and has reigned supreme until now. "Underground", "Indie", and "Alternative" groups/musicians are finally getting the attention and money they deserve - thanks - in great part to the internet. We now have a medium to bring attention to ourselves. It brought STABILITY AND EQUALITY to the playing field. We all know that's not good in the long run for those folks who simply suck at what they do.

Film has been effected to a lesser extent. There are still good directors out there that have been around before the influx of crappy movies. That's mainly because directors have a longer life expectancy than pop stars. There's still a positive influence. What irks them is the fact that independent studios are forming and they're also bringing in attention and customers. While that field of art is farther back than music, it's catching up.

Anyways, that guy is a douche. He's your typical single-minded, rigid, kook. It's not about the art, it's all about the revenue. It's not about the facts, it's about the sensationalism.

AKA,

Superficiality.

I think we all tend to be quite biased as right now we are posting as what Fuhrer Keen refers to as 'amateurs.'

In his perfect world, only state-authorized writers would spread the media bias' lies. That would be good for business though...The only sponsored author in the country has the right to post whatever they want...Regardless of the 'truthiness' as Colbert my favorite tv journalist says.

I find it funny that a college educated journalist would have the gall to make jokes of the people who read his materials. The average person who has any brain at all is going to have their own opinion. Why should it not be heard?

We do not live in a democracy, but it is close- Constitutional Republic. We have decided who will represent our best interests. When those representatives have not been doing what they promised before elected, it is up to the 'ignorant' masses (as Keen calls us) to rise up and slap them in the face.

Keen has an overinflated ego that needs to be kept in check. He should read a little more about the ego to understand what is wrong with his viewpoints.

He sounds like a ten year old child with an attitude problem .

[edit on 23-10-2007 by biggie smalls]

reply to post by GAOTU789


better enjoy the freedom we have right now to express ourselves and get ideas across we would'nt think of on our own right away-----censorship is coming----the united nations has received complaints from the eu about the internet and wants it censored a year ago.i already am censored in various ways by microsoft? when i visit websites they dont like?----constant warnings when i visit cnn others like washinton post or new york post microsoft developes a problem and must shut down-------its so annoying its not worth even looking at some sites------israelinsider---this computer hacked at least 3x by ? someone.and then you try and get ahmadinejads e-mail address to give him a piece of you mind------forget it ----thats censored by our government?-----in the states you can find out on google how many and what kind of criminals live next door to you-------not here in canada thats censored---------i'm sure its only going to get worse-----cant let the slaves get too smart---they might revolt !

Never heard of the guy



One liner Oh well woo hoo now two lines

mikell three lines


No four

Keen is a crybaby

What a darn shame.
Putting power into the peoples hands.
Allowing people to micro-publish without regards to advertisers, or editors with agendas.


For years and years, most major media has enjoyed a "buffer zone".
There was really no way to immediately react to a story. You had to make a phone call, or write a letter.
Then some schmuck would screen your call, or your letter. Maybe it would be published, maybe not.

Now...things are different.
Reaction can be immediate, and unfettered by those buffers.
Major media cannot just force-feed pablum to the populace, "professional" journalists have to answer to the higher authority of
their own consumers. Who have become more than that.

Mainstream folks are now the PRODUCERS, as well as the consumers of content.
And thats the way, uh-huh uh-huh...we like it.

reply to post by Majic


Yes the hypocrisy of it is almost laughable. Almost. It actually would be humorous to the point of tears if he wasn't so serious.

People like Andrew Keen worry me. It will be folks like him that will be pushing for the complete censorship of the internet based on the flawed argument that "we the people" can't be trusted. This is elitism in one of it's truer forms. This is very similar to Christianity in the Dark Ages. They controlled the populace by keeping them uneducated and illiterate. The masses couldn't be trusted with "God's message" because we couldn't understand it's true meaning.Sound familiar?

The digital revolution has many people in media and traditional information industries extremely worried.What used to be the sole domain of print and televised media has now been transfered into the realm of the average person. The problem is that a lot of the people in the MSM are just starting to wake up to what the internet has to offer. It has only been the last 2-3 years that a serious push has been made by them to get online and start to try to utilize the most powerful tool in the information realm. I have a couple of friends here that work for the local paper and some of the comments they have made about what their bosses think about the net is just down right ignorant. My favorite from about a year and a half ago.

" I don't pay you to read that god damn internet, I pay you to find stories for my paper."

I would encourage all of you to actually read a small part of what he has to say. Many of the comments here reflect exactly what he is talking about. Here's just a few pages, certainly not too onerous for the Web 2.0 user-generated intelligentsia to process. I'm not disagreeing entirely with anyone here. There have been some awfully good points made. I just think your arguments would be stronger and better informed if you actually read the material you are criticizing.

reply to post by schuyler


I have read a lot about him. And to be honest some of what he says does make sense. But his elitist view on who should and shouldn't be able to considered professional just doesn't sit well with me.

He compares bloggers to a million monkeys at a million typewriters

Andrew Keen says the internet is populated by second-rate amateurs - and that it is swiftly destroying our culture.

source

It's things like those comments that just rub me the wrong way. There are many many qualified people writing on the net. Just look at the cross section of members here. I am sure many here have been published both professionally and academically and possibly even published professionally as an academic. Do those members count as amateur's?

better enjoy the freedom we have right now to express ourselves and get ideas across we would'nt think of on our own right away-----censorship is coming----the united nations has received complaints from the eu about the internet and wants it censored a year ago.i already am censored in various ways by microsoft? when i visit websites they dont like?----constant warnings when i visit cnn others like washinton post or new york post microsoft developes a problem and must shut down-------its so annoying its not worth even looking at some sites------israelinsider---this computer hacked at least 3x by ? someone.and then you try and get ahmadinejads e-mail address to give him a piece of you mind------forget it ----thats censored by our government?-----in the states you can find out on google how many and what kind of criminals live next door to you-------not here in canada thats censored---------i'm sure its only going to get worse-----cant let the slaves get too smart---they might revolt !

looks like someone needs to start using linux and get some real internet security. though i am sure Keen does not like linux because its run by a bunch of amateurs.... (joke). it is startling that his spanish inquisition (which nobody expects) is geared a lot toward his hatred of wikipedia(which is, like linux, open source and free).

Keen claims he isn't really going after the bloggers so much as the influential idealists who actually run Web 2.0. "My real targets are what I would call the libertarians on the right and the left," he says. To Keen, the "democratised" web is actually a form of oligarchy, the product of an unholy alliance between old counterculturalists ("fat guys with beards, basically") and free-market fundamentalists (he offers Chris Anderson, author of The Long Tail, as an example). The former group, he says, reject "all forms of external authority"; the latter believe "that if you just leave everything alone it will work itself out".

LINK

hmmm... leads me to believe that the old way of shut up and color is what he wants. his bubble burst when the dotcoms (web 1.0) went down. he is just angry that someone has better ideas than he does. netscape (later evolved into mozilla) was the first company to go against the norms because they offered a free internet browser. now it is widely used and internet explorer is left scratching its head.

it may be important to note that he has financial motivation behind his theory. his company, audiocafe, went down the tubes when other, better and cheaper, products entered the market. the market is changing constantly on the internet, but lets not exclude the fact that the internet itself changed the market.

This Andrew Keen guys sounds like a bit of a moron.

Web 2.0 relates to new technologies (AJAX, etc..) that enable greater user interaction with web applications and has nothing to do with blogging!

In my opinion, web 2.0 does not exist and will never exist, because there is no such thing as Web 2.0! It is purely a marketing term used by corporations to describe the newer technologies that have come out.

The ever evolving nature of the internet means that there is no clear lines with regards to what is out there, web 2.0 is an evoloution not a revolution!

Now on to blogging, this is not something that is new! People have been able to express their opinions on the internet since its inception. The only diffrence these days is that you do not need to write a bunch of code to do so.

Does anyone know what this guys credentials are? I dont think he is qualified to have anything on the internet! No I will not read what he has written because, what I have heard so far sounds like a load of old cobblers!

I would classify what he has written in 99.9% of useless junk that is out there, along with this post

Holy Christ, it's called CAPITALISM. I've haven't heard such whining, crying douchbaggery since the third grade. This Keen clown apparently needs one hell of a tampon.

I'm not surprised though. I've been waiting for this type of outcry, and I expect more to come from big business. Of course, we won't hear about it in a blog or a book, they'll just lobby their asses off.

Personally, I love having choice, considering the current state of the entertainment industry. I haven't listened to mainstream music in over ten years, but with the internets, I don't have to hear about some great new band through the "grape vine." I've always sort of assumed that this type of monster competition would force the "professionals" to up their game. I'm waiting for the day that I can turn on the television or radio and think to myself, "hey, that's pretty cool."

My rant on the current entertainment industry doesn't apply to Opie and Anthony. They have, and always will, rule. And that stained shirt having putz I got a picture with, he's cool too.

What this guy doesn't get, is that this is the information age, and with it comes a rethinking of many things, including intellectual property - songs, thoughts, art, ideas and more.

Take the music industry for example. Time was, they controled the one thing that really matters. Distribution. Oh sure, there was a time when one could go the REM route and play colleges and pimp their records to the college radio stations until there was enough of a buzz and demand that, well...you got a deal with the man and he insured your records were in all the stores. And if you were lucky, that you were even on the playlists of the radio stations in the largest cities.

And they owned that, stock, lock and barrel. Of course they were threatened by the internet. Of course they did everything they could to keep hold on their control. And of course, losing that, the industry is failing. It was built on a structure that, in this new age, doesnt' exist any more.

He talks about how sick the idea of democratization of things makes him. While I agree, that means you have to sift through a lot of baloney some times, it's really the same thing that the record industy has gone through.

It's giving up control.

I'm sure there are downsides to this new world of ours. But we will figure them out.

[edit on 23-10-2007 by Jadette]

Here we go. The powers that be will try to regulate the Internet sooner or later, and when they do, free one-to-many communications will be dead and alternate views will be impossible.

My theory is that they will actually use the 9/11 conspiracy theories gaining so much ground to say that the Internet fills peoples head with junk and is dangerous to society. Ironic, isnt it...

The old structures are dying and the powers that be will try to keep control for as long as they can. They want everybody dumbed down, listening to Fox News, begging for more and more security until nobody can "disturb the peace" ever, ever again.


[edit on 24-10-2007 by Copernicus]

reply to post by yahn goodey


I call BS on your argument about crashing your browser somehow as a form of censorship. That’s just plain ridiculous. Web browsers are for reading, not publishing. And when bugs are found which consistently crash a web browser, they’re fixed by the developers pretty quickly. And almost all such bugs are browser-specific; for example something that crashes Firefox will not crash IE or Opera. You’re either using a crap browser or you’re visiting crap sites, or both. Quit whining and do something about it.

As for criminals, they have about the same rights as everybody else once they’ve served their time.