Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Democratized media
1. How does keen define democratized media?
A democracy is when people get to elect representatives through a clear consensus and have equal control over certain matters. So basically it means being free to listen to who you want and to what you want. Andrew Keen doesn't mind the internet but he does mind what it stand for. He calls it democratized media. People can post there opinion about anything, record music and make art and put it on the internet. According to Keen this puts artist and musicians out of work. Anyone can upload a video and edit it without any film knowledge and put music on the internet without any recording experience. So users on the internet can download and view that art without paying for it. Mere amateurs can produce art or any content and put it on the internet, putting real artists out of business, that is what Keen has a problem with.
2. Keen vs. Rushkoff view on social media.
Both Keen and Rushkoff have a problem with social media in that it has taking control over people and their view points. The internet and media, no matter how biased or conniving it may be, has drawn people away from the appreciation of the work they do, for example the things they create and produce. Keen has a problem with the internet and how it makes the "amateur" something that they are not. It makes users look professional while the actually professionals are loosing money. An example is a musical artist who's music is being stolen offline for free instead of being bought. Rushkoff has a problem with the internet and media in that it forces people to work and produce just for corporations. I really find Ruchkoffs argument interesting. Social media has drawn people away from face to face contact, it has drawn people away from self worth. Everything is a monopoly and instead of creating for pleasure people are creating for corporations so they can make money.
A democracy is when people get to elect representatives through a clear consensus and have equal control over certain matters. So basically it means being free to listen to who you want and to what you want. Andrew Keen doesn't mind the internet but he does mind what it stand for. He calls it democratized media. People can post there opinion about anything, record music and make art and put it on the internet. According to Keen this puts artist and musicians out of work. Anyone can upload a video and edit it without any film knowledge and put music on the internet without any recording experience. So users on the internet can download and view that art without paying for it. Mere amateurs can produce art or any content and put it on the internet, putting real artists out of business, that is what Keen has a problem with.
2. Keen vs. Rushkoff view on social media.
Both Keen and Rushkoff have a problem with social media in that it has taking control over people and their view points. The internet and media, no matter how biased or conniving it may be, has drawn people away from the appreciation of the work they do, for example the things they create and produce. Keen has a problem with the internet and how it makes the "amateur" something that they are not. It makes users look professional while the actually professionals are loosing money. An example is a musical artist who's music is being stolen offline for free instead of being bought. Rushkoff has a problem with the internet and media in that it forces people to work and produce just for corporations. I really find Ruchkoffs argument interesting. Social media has drawn people away from face to face contact, it has drawn people away from self worth. Everything is a monopoly and instead of creating for pleasure people are creating for corporations so they can make money.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)