Vector LoGo

Keen

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 democratized media as content put out by the masses by use of the internet for everyone to view.  He finds faults in this "deomocratized media" because there is a lack of responsibilty and credibility by people posting their opinions or creative views. This goes hand-in-hand with the idea of folksonomy written about in my previous blog. This trend has lead people to feel a sense of entitlement to post their feelings, distort facts, and lead to an amatuer approach to articles, videos, blogs, etc. found on the web. Websites such as youtube.com allow users to to post amatuer videos that may devalue legitimate and credible works found on the website. The idea of "disintermediation" cuts out the middle man and leaves little to no supervision of what is posted on the interenet. Keen sees the oppurtunity and potential the internet has in allowing mass opinion and creativity to be exposed. However, it also leaves a question of "what will happen to legitimate and proffesional works?"

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!?)

Keen and Rushkoff have opposing views on social media. Keen views it as a hazard to our society, while Rushkoff sees the upside of it. Rushkoff sees the potential of Web 2.0. He feels that if utilized properly the possibilities of the internet age are endless. The average person will have the same ability to voice their opinion and be as creative as those who control the mass media. Keen feels like the web will be the destruction of the word and the way people socialize and construct factless writings that the population will soak in. I believe Keen has a more realistic view of the internet. Too often I have found myself reading articles or watching amatuer videos releasing incorrect and creditless information. If left to the masses to decipher fact from opinion there will be a slew of misinformed people. Misinformation or interpretations could cause many problems within society regarding the way people think and interact. The internet has a great amount of power in today's society and I am not certain that it is ready to be unpatrolled.

Comments

I commented on Vicky, Becky, and Meg's postings.

Folksonomy and the folks

The internet has become a forum for a free flow of ideas and opinions from people of all walks of life. On the surface this would seem like a positive approach to a country founded on the principle of "freedom of speech". However, over recent years people have found a sense of entitlement through the internet that has resulted in a loss of credibility throughout most of what is published across the web. Blogs, articles, postings, etc. are often times places for people to rant about their own personal opinions without sources, facts, or an unbiased outlook to consider. This approach has in turn caused media sources which are valid, credible postings to lose its integrity simply by being posted on the internet.

Professionalism has been devalued in some regard by the amateur nature of the internet. People are less likely to be able to differentiate from professional postings of videos, news, etc. and rather follow whatever trendy, flashy, entertaining outlet is being put forth. Although, one could view this as a way for people to learn how to sort through the nonsense put out and find the truth that lies within the media. Professional outlets must learn how to integrate the amateur phenomenon that has swept the internet into their own professional standard.

Democracy has always based itself on the ability for the voice of the common people to be heard. The new found folksonomy through the web has allowed this to be true. However, it must be used responsibly to ensure proper results and reasoning. The value of one post goes hand in hand with the integrity of the thousands of other voices being expressed, without proper posts and opinions then anything one deems not synonymous with their own opinion will be disregarded.

The internet is a tool never before experienced. It is a way for the common man to get his or her voice heard by the masses. It is a power that must be harnessed responsibly and educatedly. Without proper use of this power, the amateur videos, postings, blogs, etc. will be lost in a shuffle of uncredible voices streaming through the web.

Social Media Questions

1) I believe that production quality will continue to get better for amateur user-generated videos. Although many people enjoy the realistic depictions shown in many commercials and television shows there is also a strong movement towards high definition and 3D filming. As technology progresses these types of productions will become the norm for television, as well as a progression in amateur films.

2) I find myself using facebook and twitter. Facebook is a great place for social networking because it allows you to experience a portion of a friends life quickly and easily, while twitter is convenient for me to use on my smart phone and it allows me to quickly skim through multiple people's jokes and opinions. I believe the layout of facebook as well as its user friendly features made it more successful then MySpace. MySpace had an extremely basic outlay without many of the features that drew people towards Facebook. Facebook continues to make adjustments and changes to keep it relevant therefore I believe it is here to stay.

3) Transparency has become such an important concept in social media because in today's digital age much of business operations, news, and personal information can be through these arenas. When using the internet people can hide behind false names or descriptions and allow for untruthful or slanderous material to be leaked out. I believe transparency is just as, if not more, important in the offline world. It is understandable not to trust what is seen on the internet, however, once faith is lost in the real world then nothing said or written will be perceived as accurate.