Collective Thoughts

Social media gives us the ability to practice in public more than ever before.  Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

If you’ve ever read The Cult of the Amateur by Andrew Keen (I just finished reading it), you get a pretty clear read on what he thinks of most user-generated content:  very little.  His concerns range from the welfare of professional content creators (who are losing out to massive quantities of amateur content)  to the disintegration of Western civilization by narcissistic neophytes who post amateur videos and pictures on Facebook, YouTube and MySpace whilst reducing their (and our?) collective IQs.  If you buy his arguments, there are some pretty serious problems that Web 2.0 and social media have to be held accountable for.

But the rise of the amateur isn’t one of them.  Amateurs have always been around.  They’re just more visible now.

There’s no doubt that modern Web technologies have made it monumentally easier to create content in a fraction of the time that it used to take to create audio programs, short movies, or magazine articles.  There’s definitely a plethora of user-generated content (the term often used to described all of the comments, articles, videos, posts, etc. made available on ostensibly free websites) on the Web and yes, some of it stinks.  Some of it is excellent and there’s probably a big pile of stuff in the middle that’s mediocre at best. 

A lot of crap was made prior to Web 2.0 as well.  Tons and tons of it.  There may have been less amateur content in years past than there is now because the enabling technologies that make it a snap to publish photos, videos, blogs, and podcasts didn’t exist or weren’t affordable a decade ago.  But it was certainly around.

Amateur video.  Homemade comedy cassettes.  Fanzines.  APAzines.  Community theatre.  Community-access TV.  College radio.  Open mike nights at comedy clubs.

There have always been places for the unpaid creator to practice their avocation.  There have always been people who slave over these hobbies because, well, they’re fun things to do.  Funny thing:  many of them went on to become bona fide professionals, earning a living using the skills that they developed during their hobbies.  The production of dreck is an accepted side-effect of practicing and honing your skills as you try to become better.

The only major change is that people can now practice in public on a much larger scale than the previous generation could ever have done.  They do stuff for free because they love to and because they see it as a means to an end, the next step on a long, daring journey to mastery.

Alternatives to mainstream media have always existed but social media, Web 2.0, and high speed Internet have made it easier than before to publish. 

I don’t deny that social media has allowed some content to come to light that might have been better buried in a locked drawer somewhere out of reach.  But I don’t think that giving the amateur a chance to air his or her work in public is, at heart, a bad thing.  I think it’s a great opportunity for people who have dreamed of a chance to reach a larger audience.  It may make for a noisier world and it may force professionals to turn things up a notch to compete, but the enabling technologies are here to stay.  The genie’s out of the bottle; might as well enjoy the ride.

Image by rhurtubia

While practicing in public, Mark Dykeman writes at Broadcasting Brain and other fine blogs.  You can find him on Twitter when he least expects it.