The cult of the amateur?
This London Times article concerns a book by net entrepreneur Andrew Keen. Quote relevant to CZ:
“Once dismantled, I fear that this professional media – with its rich ecosystem of writers, editors, agents, talent scouts, journalists, publishers, musicians, reporters and actors – can never again be put back together. We destroy it at our peril,” says Keen.
He is not against technology: he just wants to see a bit more control. We must choose between sites such as Wikipedia, where the cult of the anonymous amateur prevails, and the newer alternative Citizendium, which aims to improve on Wikipedia’s model by adding “gentle expert oversight” and requiring contributors to use their real names.
The book is called The Cult of the Amateur, due out Tuesday. It’s relevant to CZ because in the final, “Solutions,” chapter, Citizendium is offered as the first example of “a way to balance the best of the digital future without destroying the institutions of the past.” I read a review copy a few months ago. I’ve talked to Andrew Keen for hours. I don’t necessarily agree with everything he says–indeed, I think he gets a fair bit wrong–and he all but admits that he’s being deliberately provocative. But frankly, I view his book as a breath of fresh air in a sometimes stale debate about the merits and future directions of Web 2.0. It will be interesting to see how the book is received. Don’t expect it to be hailed in Silicon Valley.
One part that makes me nervous is “a bit more control,” and the final paragraph of the article:
Where necessary, governments should intervene, as the Americans did last year by clamping down on gambling sites. “This is not about being herded into a gulag but the complete flattening of culture so that everything becomes a commercial break,” says Keen. “‘Free culture’ is about giving it away so that you can advertise. I grew up wondering why there were no ads in novels. That was because I was prepared to spend money to buy the book.”
“Governments should intervene” — when, and how? Well, that’s what I mean when I say that the book is provocative.
Maybe I’ll post a review.
A review would be nice.
Proving Keen’s point, the blogosphere is already turning up reviews…from people who have yet to actually read the book.
Comment by Stephen Ewen — June 3, 2007 @ 4:14 pm
We mentioned this last month on our news site: http://www.gaymarketnews.com/2007/05/cult-of-amateur-internet-culture.html - and I think (not having yet had the chance to read the book) I probably am in agreement with Keen insofar as his Wikipedia remarks.
We gave up relying on WP many many months ago - after seeing what is done by quite clearly unqualified people asserting themselves in ‘packs’.
I was involved in the early days in contributing to the gay marketing article there, having spent 15 years consulting to some of the biggest brands in the world, but there is just no point in wasting time on it anymore when the material that appears so often gets deleted or adulterated, often because it is supposedly not “notable” - as decided upon by people who most times know nothing about such a specialized topic area.
I now just see WP as a new form of (often) student graffiti - a first chance to assert their opinions on others by “tagging” the articles. I don’t like graffiti in public and I most certainly don’t like it any more in a public resource “encyclopedia”.
We think you are right to start afresh and wish you nothing but success with Citizendium. The technology supports it, and the world really needs a reliable and freely accessible online encyclopedia.
Look forward to reading your review of Andrew Keen’s book, if you choose to write one.
Comment by Ian Johnson, Out Now Consulting — June 4, 2007 @ 6:42 am