dagblog - Comments for "Consensus"

Just one thought in all of

Elusive Trope — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:55:07 +0000

In reply to Thank you, quinn, for a great

Just one thought in all of this has to do with the quality of analysis and summary provided. What I mean is that if what I want to know is what is happening in Libya, there is definitely some value that can be had with just someone pointing their camera phone at the scene happening in front of them and posting it. In some very significant ways, this new flood of information coming from the "everyone is a news correspondent" has improved our understanding of current events. But there is also something that comes from a true seasoned foreign news correspondent who is on the ground gathering information from a variety of sources and putting that information into a larger context. One of the key issues here is that person needs to get paid by someone. That is where institutions like the Grey Lady come in. That have the available resources to put someone on the ground who knows what he or she is doing. But in order to generate those resources, the institution has to create a certain level of "readership" -- and the gaga effect then goes into play.

Short answer: Where there are

cmaukonen — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:37:15 +0000

In reply to Thank you, quinn, for a great

Short answer: Where there are humans you will find flies and Buddhas.

Long answer: When wireless first came out it was pure bedlam but it eventually led to much safer ocean travel, air travel and well travel of any kind. As well as educational and artistic programming that could and did reach clear around the world. But with a lot of glunk glunks and glick glicks along the way.

below

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:35:14 +0000

In reply to Genghis, a couple of

below

Thank you, quinn, for a great

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:15:28 +0000

In reply to Consensus

Thank you, quinn, for a great response. I haven't replied until now because I've been chewing on it. Not that I have a lot to show for the mastication efforts.

First, other than the gnashing of teeth among news organizations with declining profits and the usual dross about new technology destroying teenagers' brains, I haven't seen many warnings about widespread negative impact from social networks. Most of the detractors so far seem to just dismiss them, and of course, there are plenty of rah-rah technologists on the other side talking them up.

Similarly, while past technological breakthroughs from the printing press to the telephone have also had their detractors, it's not clear how pervasive the alarm was, though I grant you that the advent of democracy was a bumpy road.

That said, I hear you. My concerns could well be the modern equivalent of some fusty British lord bemoaning government by the rabble--which would be particularly ironic since I launched a career from new media.

So let's spin out the positive. I do think that people are getting a lot more information about topics that interest them then they used. Speaking personally, much of my political education came directly and indirectly through the blogosphere--from bloggers' links and commentary as well as from old media research inspired by bloggers' links and commentary.

The positive value of the changing flows of information rests on: a) the overall quality of the information, and b) the opportunity cost of quality information that they might have otherwise received.

On a) you're right that looking at Lady Gaga's hit numbers may miss the long tail of quality info that people are consuming in localized niches. I'm not sure how to measure that though.

On b), I don't think that you've addressed my concern that old media news sources will be forced to go gaga for Gaga in order to compete in the new order. It's fun to smack around the Gray Lady, but I think it will be a national loss if she morphs into Arianna Huffington.

But there's a bigger issue that I'm struggling to wrap my imagination around, and that is what will the new information order really look like. I feel like I'm staring at a newly invented printing press, and I can see that it's got a bright future ahead of it in the Bible-business, but I have little sense of the literature and philosophy it will enable, the scientific advances it will facilitate, or the revolutions it will provoke. Thoughts?