Tech Explorer

This morning I read this post by David Weinberger which in turn is talking about this post by Donnacha DeLong. The theme of Donnacha’s article can be summed up in the final paragraph, he says:

There are those who claim that Web 2.0 democratises the media. It would make everyone equal, yes, but should they be? It’s like saying anyone can play for Manchester United. In one of the main examples given to explain Web 2.0, Wikipedia replaces Britannica Online. Is that the kind of democracy we want – where anyone can determine the information that the public can access, regardless of their level of knowledge, expertise or agenda?

David comments on two areas of the article, and I’ll not repeat them here. I encourage you to read both posts and make up your own mind. The area that I’ve been thinking about is the final sentence. Yes, I think do want a kind of democracy on the Internet where everyone can determine the information that the public can access.

That does not mean that the quality of the information is the same, or that the value to the public is the same. It may not be content that everyone wants to read, or is even acceptable to all parts of the community. It just means that everyone should have the same possibilities to publish their content. In fact I’d go so far as to say it is the right now of every ‘netizen’ to publish their own content.

For as Dave Lee wrote in this post:

Should everyone be equal? Stupid question. Of course they should. And yes, it’s EXACTLY like saying everyone can play for Manchester United. Because everyone can… if they’re good enough. Not everyone has the skill to be a columnist for The Times, but that doesn’t mean we should stop them blogging on their own patch. It’s the journalism equivalent of having a kick about in the park. Just because little Jimmy isn’t good enough to play for Manchester United doesn’t mean the F.A come and confiscate his ball now does it?

I believe that with this ‘right’ is an obligation. The obligation is to acquire the appropriate skills to analyse, and think critically about the information that we find on the Internet to decide on its quality and reliability. I think we’ll also see more tools to help us in finding, collecting, analysing and using the information that we need.

To my mind this means that we need journalists, publishers, and other aspects of the ‘old media’, for without the old media we wouldn’t have the ‘new media’. It may be naive of me, but I believe what we’ll see is a change in the landscape of media. There will be more self publishing and I also believe the ‘old media’ will still be relevant. It’s just the landscape will change, and as we all know change is scary.

Fear is one third of FUD, and we’re certainly seeing a lot of that in the debates around Web 2.0 that have the other two thirds as well.

The photo “The Brown Round” was uploaded by j. botter to Flickr and discovered using the everystockphoto.com search engine.