So, why am I asking myself if I am a monkey with a typewriter? Merely because the book I have just read says so. I have just read a book called The cult of the amateur – why today’s internet is killing our culture by Andrew Keen. To summarize the book, Keen argues that our moral values is getting devoured and that the usage of blogs, social online networks and the collective intelligence in search engines and online stores in the end will lead to the end of medias like newspapers, TV as well as institutions like record companies and physical record- and bookstores that will have to close if they can’t obey the large masses. My first thought after finishing that book is why I blog? And after a while: where in this mess of yet thousands and thousands of self written musicians, journalists and video creators do I place myself? I will soon have a bachelor's degree in music production – does this make me an expert? Do I feel more of an expert because of it?
Before I will give you an answer to those questions I would like to address the attention towards the society of which Keen is really harsh against – that is this society: the blogosphere. First of all I do think it is funny that a book that talks about web 2.0 as a big threat to our culture still has its own blog-like website. It is called The great seduction where Keen discusses media culture and technology. Just a thought. Even more funny is that he has linked to Wikipedia – one of the sites which he really seems to hate. Above that he also has about two blogentries every month.
I took the liberty to search for blogs that are talking about Andrew Keen and his manifesto. What I found was a massive criticism against the author himself as well as the book. What I found were also some really interesting points in the debate.
The first point was made in this blog where the author claims that perhaps web 2.0 is deteriorating our society, but at the same time says that isn’t it fair the claim that the institutions that Keen say should be the ones giving us for example news also need to evaluate their work. I personally think that it is a fair assumption – because just as I am careful with the so called real facts that you sometimes find in blogs, shouldn’t I be an equally suspicious reader while opening the newspaper. It is about knowing that all sources are not reliable sources – and it really doesn’t have to do with the source. Sure I probably feel more secure reading a newspaper than I do reading a blog. It is in that statement that the problem lies. I really don’t see a reason putting these institutions on a pedestal just because people working there are educated and have experience with news – in this case. What I am trying to say is that it is not about trusting one or the other source of information – it is about knowing where to find different kinds of information, collect all different views on a subject, and then have your own opinion about it. The truth is that all facts in some ways have been altered and they are bound to be subjective. Perhaps this is the most obvious problem with a blog – people in general like to have an opinion, but many times it is only based on one source - one fact - and most of the time it is the source that makes the information the most interesting from that persons point of view.
Another blog has a good point of view regarding the statement above. He says that people have always tried to express themselves through music, arts, writing and such – but it is with web 2.0 that they have the ability to put it online. But just because a person is for example writing – does this mean that everyone is reading it? Of course not. Just as the example of people showing their work to close friends and relatives you will most likely have the same progress – with the only difference that it is online. It is there for the world to see, but most of the world will not care about it anyway. Perhaps Keen is right when he says that bloggers have too much power – but we are really not talking about all of the blogs, but instead a small number of blogs. As I see it the gatekeepers have moved from magazines and newspapers into cyberspace.
I do feel that some blogs has gotten the wrong idea about Keen himself. As he is saying in an interview on a show called The Agenda he is neither against technology nor entrepreneurialism online. This is a crucial point, since many people have felt the need to really go down on the author himself in their blog instead of the book itself, and as he says in that same interview he is against user generated content. These two blogs for example: here and here. The first one is about Keen being a douchebag – first of all any person who actually tags their blog with that word and then tries to have a discussion about it is just not worth listening to from my point of view. Sure he might truly believe that Keen is an idiot, but it is not fair to the author nor the people reading the book or blog to use that kind of language – especially not if your goal is to be authentic. It is also from my point of view not right to say that someone else has good thoughts in the subject and then just have one link. The other blog is calling Keen ”The Most Pathetic Human Being in Existence” – again why use this phrasing if you try to have a decent discussion about the subject. I do understand why the blogging community is upset – as this blog says: “Again, how do you argue with a man who’s calling you an ignorant, egotistic, boorish monkey?”. He then argues that: “…we need to find some common ground on which to argue”. Clearly it is such statements that should be heard – not people placing themselves on the opposite side having the same extreme and ignorant beliefs. In fact it is extremely smart of Keen to write the book the way he has – since the reaction it got from the blogosphere was expected and with that the publicity that he wanted.
From my standpoint I must ask myself: why is it always a discussion about either or? It is the same problem with the discussion about illegal music downloading. It is like you have to take one side – when the truth is clearly somewhere in the middle. It is the same with Andrew Keen’s book. He has some really good points – for example his discussion about knowing where a source is really from. I totally agree when he claims that the web makes it far too easy for people to hide behind it as a way to manipulate other people – to be totally anonymous. Youtube has that problem as well as Wikipedia. I also believe that it is right that some universities have banned Wikipedia as a source of information for essays and papers. In the interview on The Agenda and in his book Keen is right concerning the fact that Wikipedia really does not have a righteous system for its material – there is no scale. Sure some posts has been locked from editing, but that is just a way for Wikipedia to not take their responsibility.
When he starts to attack services like Amazon I do feel that he has stepped over the line. He claims for example that the algorithms that suggest that if you like this you might like that, can never compare to the knowledge of a real person in a physical music- or bookstore. I agree that a real person has a broader knowledge – but why is there a need to get upset getting a tip of something that you might actually enjoy? Take for example the service last.fm – which indeed is one of those communitys that Keen probably would hate. It is a brilliant example of when collective knowledge is as good as it gets. I personally got really good suggestions to new artists and bands. I have also spoken to many people within the music industry that feel that this is one possible way to go.
Now back to my original questions. First of all: am I a monkey with a typewriter? Well, no I don’t consider myself as a monkey with a typewriter – nor do I feel that anyone blogging is one. I still do think that it is a good point which leads to the second question: why do I blog? I could make it easy and say that it is part of a course, but even if that is true I would probably blog even if I hadn’t been on the course. I don’t see myself as an expert. Yes, I am educated, but I am far from an expert. For example I don’t have the working experience needed – but if anyone out there would want to give me the opportunity to progress within the music industry feel free contact me. Still, people blogging should really ask each other the same question.
So to answer that question: I think I blog since it is an opportunity to express a thought, but mostly I do to have discussions. I don’t have an urge to scream “Look at me” under the oath of: I blog and therefore I am. Sure I want people to read my blog, but it is to get a discussion going. Because let's face it: you will not automatically be seen because of a blog – just as you probably will not get a record deal for having a myspace-page.
