« Biz Author Faces Critic | Main | Wedding Rings May Cause Impotence »
October 13, 2005
Web 2.0: The Triumph of Amateur Hour?
I have never, ever understood the cult of professionalism adhered to by some journalists (bloggers have no journalism degrees, bloggers bad amateurs, bloggers threaten professionals, so must be crushed). Nor have I been on the bandwagon to eviserate those bastard pros that some "citizen journalists" have been riding for years. This either/or bullshit drives me nuts. It doesn't have to be a contest. But it is, and Nicholas Carr articulates in lucid, deadly prose both the problem with Wikipedia worship (he cites examples) and why, despite its flaws, the Cult of the Amateur will probably triumph.
The promoters of Web 2.0 venerate the amateur and distrust the professional. We see it in their unalloyed praise of Wikipedia. ... Perhaps nowhere, though, is their love of amateurism so apparent as in their promotion of blogging as an alternative to what they call "the mainstream media." Here's O'Reilly: "While mainstream media may see individual blogs as competitors, what is really unnerving is that the competition is with the blogosphere as a whole. This is not just a competition between sites, but a competition between business models. The world of Web 2.0 is also the world of what Dan Gillmor calls 'we, the media,' a world in which 'the former audience,' not a few people in a back room, decides what's important."
But wait, there's more:
I'm all for blogs and blogging. (I'm writing this, ain't I?) But I'm not blind to the limitations and the flaws of the blogosphere - its superficiality, its emphasis on opinion over reporting, its echolalia, its tendency to reinforce rather than challenge ideological extremism and segregation. Now, all the same criticisms can (and should) be hurled at segments of the mainstream media. And yet, at its best, the mainstream media is able to do things that are different from - and, yes, more important than - what bloggers can do. ... The Internet is changing the economics of creative work - or, to put it more broadly, the economics of culture - and it's doing it in a way that may well restrict rather than expand our choices. Wikipedia might be a pale shadow of the Britannica, but because it's created by amateurs rather than professionals, it's free. And free trumps quality all the time.
Thanks to Dave Kearns for the link. More on the amateur-pro grudge match later.
Posted by Deborah Branscum at October 13, 2005 12:54 PM
Comments
I don't think Carr is playing a zero-sum game. I think he's trying to avoid having to play one.
Posted by: Pete at October 14, 2005 05:20 AM