The Cult of the Amateur: How the Internet Is Killing Our Culture ( ISBN 0385520808 ) is a 2007 book written by entrepreneur and Internet critic Andrew Keen . Published by Currency , Keen’s first book is a review of the enthusiasm surrounding user generated content , peer production , and other Web 2.0 -related phenomena. [1]

The book was based on the controversial essay Keen, for the Weekly Standard , criticizing Web 2.0 for being similar to Marxism , for destroying professionalism and for making it impossible to find high quality material. [1] [2] [3]

Contents

Keen argues against the idea of ​​a read-write culture in media, stating that “most of the content being shared-no matter how many times it has been linked, cross-linked, annotated, and copied- The sweat of their creative brow and the disciplined use of their talent. ” As Such, Such As he contrasts companies Time Warner and Disney That “create and Produce movies, music, magazines, and television” with companies Such As Google . He calls the last “has parasite” since “it creates no content of its own” and ” [4]

He elaborates on the spot by Saying, “Of course, every free listings on Craigslist means clustering one less paid listing in a local newspaper. Every visit to Wikipedia’s free information hive means clustering one less customer for a professionally Researched and edited encyclopedia Such As Britannica .” Thus, he concludes that “what is free is actually costing us a fortune.” He also refers to changes such as downsizing of newspaper business and the closing of record labels as forms of economic loss caused by internet-based social changes. [4]

Mr. Keen argues that the democratized Web’s penchant for mash-ups, remixes and cut-and-paste jobs threaten not just copyright laws but also the very ideas of authorship and intellectual property. He observes that as advertising dollars migrate from newspapers, magazines and television news to the Web, organizations with the expertise and resources to finance investigative and foreign reporting more and more business challenges. And he suggests that as CD sales fall and the music business becomes increasingly embattled, new artists will discover that Internet Generations of musicians.

“What you can not realize is that this is free is actually costing us a fortune,” Mr. Keen writes. “The new winners – Google, YouTube, MySpace, Craigslist, and the Hundreds of Start-ups hungry for a piece of the Web 2.0 pie – are unlikely to fill the shoes of the industries they are helping to undermine, in terms of products produced , Jobs created, revenue generated or benefits conferred. By stealing away our eyeballs, the blogs and wikis are decimating the publishing, music and news-gathering industries that the web sites’ aggregate. Our culture is essentially cannibalizing its young, destroying the very sources of the content they crave. ” [1]

Keen quotes social philosopher Jürgen Habermas about the internet and related technologies: “The price for the growth in equality by the Internet is the decentralized access to unedited stories. ” Keen states that most of modern social culture has existed with specific gatekeepers analyzing and regulating information as it reaches the masses. He views this expert-based filtering process as beneficial, improving the quality of popular discourse, and argues that it is being circumvented. [4]

He also criticizes the ability of the Internet to promote social harms such as gambling and pornography. [1] He writes, “It’s hardly surprising that the increasingly tasteless nature of such self-advertisements have resulted in social networking sites becoming infested with anonymous sexual predators and pedophiles.” He sees “cultural standards and moral values” as “stake” due to new media innovations. [5]

More broadly, Keen remarks that “history has a crowd is not often very wise” and argues against the notion that mass participation in ideas improve their quality. Britain Spears “among other things.” [1] [1] [1] [1]

Reviews and reception

The book received mixed reviews. Some traditional sources give the book positive or negative reviews while the book has negative reactions from bloggers. [1] [1] [1] [1] [1] [1] [1] The New York Times An article by Michiko Kakutani, “The Shrewdly Argued Jeremiad ” ” She wrote that the author “wanders off his subject in the later chapters of the book” but broadly “writes with acuity and passion”. [1] Daily Mail reviewer AN Wilson said that the “book will come as a real shock to many. I had never realised until reading Keen’s book that any amateur can write an entry in Wikipedia. … Keen leaves me very uneasy indeed. ” [7]

Lawrence Lessig , who was criticized in both the original essay and in the book, wrote an extremely negative review of the book in which he listed a miscellaneous of errors in the book including mischaracterizations of Lessig’s views and work. [4] [ add listing] [4] [8]

Larry Sanger , the founder of the expert-centered wiki Citizendium , gave the book a mixed review. Sanger said that “The book is provocative, but its argument is unfortunately weakened by the fact that Keen is so over-the-top and presents more of a caricature of a position than carefully reasoned discourse.” He said that it was hypocritical for Keen to express support for Citizendium , for incorporating expert opinion, when the inherent point of the project is to supply free content, which Keen so opposes in principle. Sanger stated that the book “combines several different criticisms of Web 2.0, incoherently, under the rubric of” the cult of the amateur “is a much-needed Web 2.0 reality check”. [9] [10] Tim O’Reilly commented in response to the book, “I find, Andrew Keen’s, his whole pitch, I think he was just pure and simple looking for an angle, I do not think there’s any substance whatever to his rants. ” [11] Additionally, he has said in response to the book, “I think the Internet is often held to another standard.” Bismarck, he is more important than Pamela Anderson . ‘ But people will say that about Wikipedia. It’s just bias. ” [11] I think he was just pure and simple looking for an angle to Create some controversy and sell a book, I do not think there’s Any substance whatever à son rants. ” [11] Furthermore, He Has Said in response to the book, “I think the Internet is often held to another standard. You do not say, ‘Why are not the newspapers writing about Bismarck, he’s more important than Pamela Anderson .’ But people will say that about Wikipedia. It’s just bias. ” [11] I think he was just pure and simple looking for an angle to Create some controversy and sell a book, I do not think there’s Any substance whatever à son rants. ” [11] Furthermore, He Has Said in response to the book, “I think the Internet is often held to another standard. You do not say, ‘Why are not the newspapers writing about Bismarck, he’s more important than Pamela Anderson .’ But people will say that about Wikipedia. It’s just bias. ” [11] T the newspapers writing about Bismarck, he is more important than Pamela Anderson . ‘ But people will say that about Wikipedia. It’s just bias. ” [11] T the newspapers writing about Bismarck, he is more important than Pamela Anderson . ‘ But people will say that about Wikipedia. It’s just bias. ” [11]

Anthony Trewavas , professor at the Institute of Molecular Plant Science at the University of Edinburgh , discussed the book in an article in Trends in Biotechnology . Trewavas wrote that Keen’s “concern is the blurring of the distinction between the qualified and informed professional and the uninformed and unqualified amateur”, expressing concerns that this social change can hold back agricultural development. Trewavas stated as well, “in agriculture, pesticides, food and farming, expert scientific knowledge and experience is seemingly regarded as having an unqualified (and inexperienced) environmentalist.” [12] The book has also been discussed in academic publications negatively, Expressing how OpenStreetMap , an expression of Volunteered Geographic Information . [13] [14]

Jarvis-Keen debate

Jeff Jarvis , who had previously called the original test in The Weekly Standard “snobs.com,” was challenged to a debate over Web 2.0 issues. [5] [15] Jarvis has a discussion on his blog about whether he should debate Keen and then decided to accept the offer. [3] [5]

See also

  • Books portal
  • Technology portal
  • Economic effects of Wikipedia
  • Media Criticism
  • Reliability of Wikipedia
  • Amusing Ourselves to Death
  • An Army of Davids
  • ” Is Google Making Us Stupid? “
  • The Global Trap
  • The Wisdom of Crowds

References

  1. ^ Jump up to:g Kakutani, Michiko (2007-06-29). “The Cult of the Amateur” . The New York Times . Retrieved 2008-08-20 .
  2. Jump up^ Keen, Andrew (2006-02-15). “Web 2.0: The second generation of the Internet has arrived. It’s worse than you think . ” The Weekly Standard . Retrieved 2008-08-20 .
  3. ^ Jump up to:b “Internet Amateur” . Toronto: Reutersl. 2007-02-07 . Retrieved 2008-08-20 . Dead link ]
  4. ^ Jump up to:e Lessig, Larry (2007-05-31). “Keen’s” The Cult of the Amateur “: BRILLIANT!” . Archived from the original on November 1, 2007 . Retrieved 2008-08-20 .
  5. ^ Jump up to:c Jarvis, Jeff (2007-05-10). “Your advice: Should I debate?”. BuzzMachine . Archived from the original on May 11, 2010 . Retrieved 2008-08-20 .
  6. Jump up^ Auchard, Eric (2007-06-05). “Amateur charge infuriates blogosphere” . Toronto. Archived from the original on August 4, 2009 . Retrieved 2008-08-20 .
  7. Jump up^ AN Wilson (2007-06-08). “The internet is destroying the world as we know it” . Daily Mail . London.
  8. Jump up^ “TheKeenReader” . Lessig.org (Larry Lessig). Archived fromthe original on 2008-05-24 . Retrieved 2008-08-20 .
  9. Jump up^ “Citizendium Blog” . Archived from the original on August 25, 2007 . Retrieved 7 October 2014 .
  10. Jump up^ Ritzer, G. and Jurgenson, N., 2010. Production, Consumption, Prosumption The nature of capitalism in the age of the digital ‘prosumer’. Journal of consumer culture, 10 (1), pp.13-36.
  11. ^ Jump up to:b VPRO (2007-07-17). “The Truth According To Wikipedia” . Wikipedia . VPRO . Retrieved 2008-08-20 . The title derives from words spoken by Tim O’Reilly at 38:00 in this video.
  12. Jump up^ Trewavas, Anthony (September 2008). “The cult of the amateur in agriculture threatens food security” (PDF) . Trends in Biotechnology . Elsevier . 26 (9): 475-478. Doi : 10.1016 / j.tibtech.2008.06.002 . Retrieved 2011-04-28 .
  13. Jump up^ Parker, CJ, May, AJ and Mitchell, V. (2014), “User-centred design of neogeography: the impact of volunteered geographic information on users’ perceptions of online mashups.”, Ergonomics, Vol. 57, No. 7, p. 987-97.
  14. Jump up^ Brown, M., Sharples, S., Harding, J., Parker, CJ, Bearman, N., Maguire, M., Forrest, D., et al. (2013), “Usability of Geographic Information: Current Challenges and Future Directions”, Applied Ergonomics, Applied Ergonomics: Special Issue GI Data Usability, Vol. 44 No. 6, p. 855-865.
  15. Jump up^ Jarvis, Jeff (2006-02-18). “Snobs.com” . BuzzMachine . Retrieved 2008-08-20 .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *