Always re-investing in your business ideas and productKara are given rather than being fed this information from institutions of Big Media, Big Business, and Big Government. The argument that Keen illustrates throughout this novel is that information generated by the individual will be inferior to the information generated by traditional institutions.
Keen argues that the repercussions of individually generated and collaborated information will undermine the culture of our society. This new democratized media will allow individuals to start “transforming culture into cacophony” (Keen, 2007). The only law that seems to govern this onslaught of amateur media is the law of digital Darwinism which rules that only the loudest and most opinionated will survive. Keen argues, “Democratization, despite its lofty idealization, is undermining truth, souring civic discourse, and belittling expertise, experience and talent.” Regardless of the threat this idea poses to our society, individuals still succumb to the seduction of the Web 2.0 revolution. People are mesmerized by the promise of unbiased opinions, deeper truths, and globalized perspectives, but they are blinded by what they truly receive: frivolous opinions devoid of deep analysis. These opinions are undermining fact and distorting what people accept as truth. Keen’s concern is, “This undermining of truth is threatening the quality of civil public discourse, encouraging plagiarism and intellectual property theft, and stifling creativity.”
The words ownership and authorship are being redefined in the minds of society. It is easy to remix a song or create a satirical video. The question is who holds ownership over the new content, the amateur or the artist. The copy and paste function has also led to rampant plagiarism and theft of intellectual property. Keen notes, “The intellectual consequences of such theft are profoundly disturbing…the ubiquitous remix is not only destroying the sanctity of authorship but also undermining our traditional safeguards of individual creativity.” Traditional media such as books and newspapers are not as valued as they once were. The value of traditional media “is being challenged by the dream of a collective hyperlinked community of authors who endlessly annotate and revise” (Keen, 2007). Keen uses Wikipedia as a primary example of how liquid information is on a collaborative site. “The cult of the amateur has made it increasingly difficult to determine the difference between reader and writer, between artist and spin doctor, between art and advertisement, between amateurand expert” (Keen, 2007).
The abstraction of the Web 2.0 revolution is the noble amateur. The ideal of the noble amateur is to break away from the dictatorship of expert information. This is looked upon as the epitome of democratization. Keen stands firm in his belief that democracy has a place in elections but reiterates, “a radically democratic culture is hardly conductive to scholarship or to the creation of wisdom.” In the world of the Web 2.0, the amateur is exalted over the expert. Keen once again uses Wikipedia as an example of the value placed on expert opinion. An expert in global warming was accused by an amateur of changing the Wikipedia entry on global warming to reflect his own point of view. Wikipedia administrators penalized the expert with no regard to his credentials or experience in the field. Keen states, “The consequences of the dismissal of traditional, credentialed experts on sites like Wikipedia are both chilling and absurd.” The consequence of amateur content is white noise. Traditionally, gatekeepers such as editors, technicians, and experts would filter information to deter the amount of white noise. The lack of these cultural gatekeepers leaves society open to the white noise of misinformation and unnecessary content.
White noise is especially rampant in the news. Amateur bloggers are flooding the web with news. Professional journalists undergo years of education and training to deliver clear and concise news to the public. These citizen journalists believe that having access to a computer makes them more capable of delivering news than trained professionals. The citizen journalists revel in their amateur status and wear it like a badge of honor. They believe that this status allows them to post less biased and less filtered pictures of the truth than more traditional news outlets. This is not the case. Citizen journalists are much more likely to post opinionated pieces based on news articles from the very institutions they are trying to undermine. Keen argues, “Citizen journalists simply don’t have the resources to bring us reliable news.” Amateur journalists are not held to the same standards as traditional journalists. There are no consequences for their actions and no reprimands for the false information they spread. The lack of constraint on these citizen journalists has led to a plethora of unreliable news that is misdirecting society in their search for the truth.
The reliability, accuracy, and truth of the information that we get from the internet is constantly in question. Because of the abundance of false information, society has trouble distinguishing fact from fiction. Keen highlights this by recounting the unrest that spread when a false news report was posted to the German version of YouTube. The abuse of YouTube has also spread to our politicians who run slanderous ads against their opponent on the premise that it just showed up on YouTube. Keen states, “The YouTubification of politics is a threat to civil culture. It infantilizes the political process, silencing public discourse and leaving the future of the government up to thirty-second video clips shot by camcorder-wielding amateurs with political agendas.”
The internet is the lurking ground for liars and scam artists. Some people can spot a con and not be duped, but digital scams are becoming more difficult to detect. As technology advances, the ability to detect digital scams and fraud is compromised. Keen notes, “The fact is that rumors and lies disseminated online can tarnish reputations and ruin careers.” These rumors can also spread at frightening speed. Anti defamation and libel laws that are designed to protect people from this kind of assault are nearly impossible to enforce in the digital world because of the anonymous and casual nature of the internet. Unlike the owners of traditional newspapers and news outlets, website owners are not held accountable for the content that is posted by a third party. This leads to a lack of incentive to evaluate the information that is posted on their site.
Traditionally, history has been compiled through the careful aggregation of the truth from books and news outlets. The Web 2.0 revolution has changed how we collect and store information. Today, history is being compiled through the internet, which is riddled with misinformation. This is dangerous because it is impossible to stop the spread of misinformation and this flawed information never really goes away. The history that is being recorded today is infected with false information. This infection is compounded by future readers who inherit, read, and repeat the flawed information. This repetition creates a collective memory of society that is deeply flawed. Keen reiterates that misinformation is “a fundamental flaw with user-driven content. We’re never sure if what we read or see is what it seems.” Unwittingly, people tend to seek the information that mirrors their own biases and opinions to confirm their distorted visions of reality. This leads to a perpetuation of one another’s biases and limits conversation and informed debate. Many users have strong opinions, but are severely uninformed.
False information is not the only lie lurking in the online world. Fake identities are also commonplace on the internet. The trend of creating alternate identities is so widespread that it now has its own moniker: sock puppets. Keen uses Michael Hiltzik as an example of a sock puppeteer. Hiltzik created the false blogger Mikekoshi to defend his work on his opponent’s websites. This trend is not common to blogs alone, but to YouTube, MySpace, Facebook, and other social media platforms. This multitude of fake personas or sock puppets creates distrust between internet users. This distrust is also widening the gap between truth and politics. Keen mentions the smear campaign aimed against President Obama during the 2008 election to drive his point. The story was unconfirmed and discredited, but it was still lent legitimacy by mainstream media channels. Individuals are not the only ones being mislead. Companies are also being cheated out of ad revenue by fake blogs and click bots. Keen sums it up perfectly, “the Web 2.0 world has been invaded by liars, cheats, and fraudsters.”
The Web 2.0 is run by the wisdom of the crowd. Algorithms dictate the results of searches based on an aggregation of responses from previous searches. Search engines do not necessarily provide truth or reputable answers. They simply provide the most popular answer from the millions of other people who have searched that topic. The problem lies in the fact that many people view search engine results as gospel. Duplicitous users use this gospel mentality to sway the opinions of people by Google bombing to manipulate search results. This technique has been used by many groups to sway popular opinion. The technique of Google bombing is not limited to just the Google search engine, but is used on any search engine that uses a popularity algorithm. “But even if there was such a thing as the wisdom of the crowd, should we trust it? The answer of course, is no” (Keen, 2007).
One of the biggest impacts of the digital revolution has been on the entertainment industry. Keen uses the collapse of Tower Records as an example of the demise of specialty retailers. The digital revolution is making it nearly impossible for retailers to keep up with the low prices of internet retailers such as Amazon or iTunes. From 2003-2006, over 800 music stores closed their doors for good. The collapse of the physical record store is devastating to the music industry. Keen speculates that the “truth is that with the demise of the physical record store, we may have less musical choice, fewer labels, and the emergence of an oligarchic digital retail economy dominated by Amazon.com, iTunes, and MySpace.”
Digital piracy and illegal downloading are another looming threat to the entertainment industry. With unlimited access to the web, digital piracy has become the reality for the record business. The major labels have realized that if you can’t beat the illegal downloaders you should at least make money off of them. By partnering with different companies, record labels are able to generate ad revenue from digitally pirated music tracks. The problem with this ploy to gain revenue is that the artist is not entitled to any of the royalties from the release of their songs. Amateur artists are turning to sites such as YouTube to garner fame and fortune. The problem is that internet fame does not necessarily equal fortune. The lack of revenue is affecting the quality of music being produced. The quality is beginning to suffer because it is no longer economically feasible to record quality music and Keen is concerned that “art and culture are being reduced to vehicles for the sale of other products.”
Music is not the only industry that is facing serious decreases in revenue. The publishing and movie companies are also starting to feel the pressure. The premise behind copyright laws was that creativity could only flourish if there were incentive to be creative. If literary works were given away for free, writers would be discouraged from literary production. This idea of incentive has been blown away by the digital revolution. Indiscriminate piracy is now the norm. The finished masterpiece is no longer valued for its content. It is valued for the ways that it can be annotated, linked, and changed to adapt the original texts. “When writers, and composers and music makers…can no longer hope to make a living from their work, how many works will never be written or created?” (Keen, 2007)
Traditional news papers and magazines are also falling victim to the repercussions of the digital revolution. Circulation of news papers and magazines are plummeting due to the availability of instantaneous information via the internet. Decreased circulation is causing advertisers to seek out new methods of advertising where they can reach a larger and more targeted market. The decrease in revenue has caused many publications to downsize. These downsizes include smaller publications, less frequent publications, and rounds of layoffs. Keen utilizes these layoffs as an example of how the Web 2.0 revolution is affecting our economy. It is sad when the company that produces no original content and merely provides links to content is worth more than the institutions that generate the content. The digital revolution is decimating the economy because in the past “thievery was limited to small-scale, in-store shoplifting rather than an industry-destroying, paradigm-shifting dismantling of 200 years of intellectual property law” (Keen, 2007).
“Theft of intellectual property on today’s Web 2.0 is as pervasive – and potentially as destructive – as a new strain of avian flu” (Keen, 2007). The question of ownership plays a large role in the debate of digital piracy. In a world where it is simple to copy and paste original content and make it your own, the lines of ownership are significantly blurred. Keen observes that, “Web 2.0 technology is confusing the very concept of ownership, creating a generation of plagiarists and copyright thieves with little respect for intellectual property.” It is exceedingly common for students to plagiarize others’ work to pass for their own in school. The new school of thought believes that all content on the internet should become common property. What this school of thought fails to realize is that, no matter how many times something is copied or linked, the content was originally the result of someone else’s hard work. Keen’s concern is that the widespread acceptance of the cavalier attitude towards digital theft is undermining the fundamental morals of our society. The immorality of the Web 2.0 doesn’t stop there. It is extended to gambling and pornography that is immediately available to anyone with an internet connection. Internet addictions are becoming more commonplace, and are disrupting the moral values of society.
The idea of privacy on the internet is a misconception. Everything that you do online is recorded and can be released to the public. AOL user #711391 learned this lesson the hard way when her search history was made public knowledge. She became an internet sensation, and her deepest thoughts and questions that she didn’t dare to ask her friends were broadcasted for the world to see. Instances like this raise questions about individual privacy. Information leaks have also led to insurance fraud and identity theft. Identity theft is particularly serious because it is hard to prove and hard to remedy. Identity thieves are also rarely brought to justice, because it is almost impossible to track them. Keen notes that the amount of information that is traded legally on the internet each day is much more disturbing that the information that is sometimes leaked. Keen states, “in our contemporary digital age, it is information, rather than knowledge, that lends power. And the more personal the information, the more power it promises to those who hold it” (Keen, 2007).
Keen concedes that the technology of the digital revolution is not in and of itself negative. What makes the technology negative is the way that it is being utilized. Keen urges his readers to “resist the siren song of the noble amateur and use the Web 2.0 to put trust in our experts again.” Keen believes that this can be accomplished by merging expert and amateur content. He uses Citizendium as an example of how these two differing viewpoints can be merged. Keen also notes that there are a variety of ways for the entertainment industry to make back lost revenue through the sale of album related digital media. The laws governing the digital world are also being updated and enforced in an effort to protect citizens from predators and from themselves. Keen closes with a reminder that “our real moral responsibility is to protect mainstream media against the cult of the amateur.”
Andrew Keen presents some very compelling arguments in his book, The Cult of the Amateur. While compelling, Keen’s arguments come across as radical and tend to ignore the larger picture. Overall the novel offers a compelling insight into the problems that society, especially law enforcement, is facing because of the Web 2.0. At the time this book was published, law enforcement was scrambling to update laws to cover the illegal activities going on in the digital world. Today, laws still do not encompass the problems that the digital world is posing. It would be interesting to see the current statistics on the issues that are mentioned in this novel such as the amount of amateur generated content. With the advancement of technology and the repetition of misinformation, the statistics must be truly staggering.
While Keen gets his point across to readers and fully supports his arguments with evidence, he should have considered the following:
1. Keen’s audience is severely limited by the jargon used in his book. If his goal was to reach out to the masses, he should have considered writing on a level that the average person could understand.
2. Keen adamantly rejects the idea that a noble amateur exists. He provides a mass of examples to outline the inferiority of amateur generated content, but he does not clearly define the line between expert and amateur. How much experience or education is required before an amateur becomes an expert? Is an amateur with more experience in a field than a young educated graduate in the same field still inferior, or does their experience earn them a little credibility?
3. The solutions presented in the closing chapters of The Cult of the Amateur seem plausible in theory. Keen dictates what he believes should be done, but some of his solutions are farfetched. For his solutions to be considered plausible he should include examples to demonstrate the validity of these solutions.
This novel has brought to light some grave flaws in the way the internet is perceived by the average user:
1. Fact or Fiction. Abraham Lincoln once said, “If it is on the internet then it must be true and you can’t question it.” The amount of misinformation on the internet is staggering and should be taken into account when doing research. Always make sure that the source you are gathering information from is reputable.
2. Information or Opinion. The amount of amateur generated content on the internet can be overwhelming and hard to filter. It is sometimes impossible to distinguish facts from opinions. If you are looking for truly unbiased answers, traditional sources of information such as newspapers, magazines, and books will be more reliable.
3. Predators are Lurking. The information that you post on the internet is not as secure as you might be led to believe. There are multitudes of predators online such as scam artists, sexual predators, and identity thieves. Be cautious of the information that you share with others over the internet.
The ideas presented in The Cult of the Amateur can be utilized in any career:
1. Reliability of Information. All industries rely on up to date and accurate information in the running of their companies. While information may be easy to find on the web, it doesn’t always mean the information will be correct. Wikipedia is definitely not a reliable source for information.
2. Information Safety. Digital information is extremely vulnerable to malicious attack. Be wary of the information that you store electronically. If you store copious amounts of information electronically, make sure it is protected.
3. Information is Here to Stay. Information that you put up on the internet never truly goes away. Everyone shares every nuance of their life via some form of social media. Be careful of what you post. You don’t want those posts to come back and haunt you later. This idea of permanent information is especially important to consider when you are applying for jobs.
Other Reviews of The Cult of the Amateur
“Although Mr. Keen’s objections to the publishing and distribution tools the Web provides to aspiring artists and writers sound churlish and elitist – he calls publish-on-demand services “just cheaper, more accessible versions of vanity presses where the untalented go to purchase the veneer of publication” – he is eloquent on the fallout that free, user-generated materials is having on traditional media.” (Kakutani, 2007)
• The New York Times
“Most of Keen’s 200-page polemic reads as much like an afterschool special as it does an argument. The book bounces, almost rapid fire, from topic to topic laying out the most horrible statistics and telling the worst-case stories. The entire work, it appears, is designed to answer the question “What’s the worst that can happen?” in vivid color.” (Bailey, 2007)
• Plagiarism Today
” Keen does overpolarise – he only grudgingly concedes that not everything served up by new media is trashy, paints an over-rosy picture of mainstream news providers and includes Hollywood studios in his list of threatened pillars of civilisation. But most of his points are well made, and he comes up with thought-provoking solutions, including government intervention to curb excesses.” (Dugdale, 2008)