1. Andrew Keen views of democratized media are extremely negative. He believes that this particularly type of media as well as web 2.0 are destroying our culture and harming out youth. In order to prove his point he argues that we have no way of knowing who is writing the content on the Internet. We have no way of knowing whether these people re professionals or just some amateurs that only have a vague idea of what they are doing. Keen is also worried about the idea of disintermediation, which is were amateurs are taking over positions of those once held by professionals. For example example professor Jacobsen mention in class when a guy with a Ph D in the field in question was banned from wikipedia because he try to correct them too many times.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/17/study-web-has-narrowed-no_n_91845.html
2. I believe that Keen and Rushkoff have similar but at the same time different opinions. Keen is completely against technology and the idea of Web 2.0, whereas Rushkoff is not so much against it as he is wary of it. He believes that are lives are become too revolved our the internet and technology. I think Rushkoff is able to at least accept the fact that the internet will always be around and people will continue to use it more and more, but he is not totally against like Keen is. I think Rushkoff's opinion speaks to me more. I like everyone else in our class was most likely born in the beginning of the technology boom that our world has lunched itself into. I am all for technology. I think technology is something that can greatly help us and we should take full advantage of it. I do feel however that we should never let it get to a point where we can't control it. Man should control technology, technology should never control man.
No comments:
Post a Comment