vector image request

Go giants

Keen and Democratization of the Web

1. How does Keen define Democratized media, and what are his main issues with this trend? use examples from the web in the form of links.

Keen's definition of "democratized media" is media, whether it's in the form of a news article, film, or song, that is produced, contributed to, and/or edited by non-professionals. To direct quote, "Audience and author had become one..." A good example of democratized media would be CNN's iReport where registered users can submit their own content as news to CNN.

Keen's main criticism with this recent trend is that it makes professionally produced material obsolete, and professional movie producers, musicians, artists, journalists, etc. are being replaced by amateurs with no formal training. A serious potential consequence of this is that it makes "truth and trust...the whipping boys of the Web 2.0 revolution. In a world with fewer and fewer professional editors or reviewers, how are we to know what and whom to believe?" For example, while it is moderated, anybody with computer (or web access, period) access can edit an article on Wikipedia to say whatever they want (a major reason why it is not considered a valid academic source).

2. Compare and Contrast Keens take on Social Media with Douglas Rushkoff's. Which one speaks to you and your own experiences and why?
Both Keen and Rushkoff analyze the rising presence of Web 2.0 in everyday society. However, Keen's view is that Web 2.0 is entirely bad and that it is corrupting professional content entirely. Rushkoff on the other hand simply believes that Web 2.0 content is becoming more present in everyday life and can be a bad thing if it takes over too much. He seems to acknowledge the benefits, and I agree with him more than Keen. I think Keen's view is more extreme.