Participatory media

[Tyrlop]

What is your opinion on the opportunities as well as the threats (regarding e.g. democracy and social interaction) that the digital media landscape represent?

From my point of view the new internet based participatory media is playing a huge role in modern communication and it is a growing opponent to the monopoly-based mass media. In the past 100 years the aristocracy has slowly got bigger and bigger impact on mass media. Because of that, most mainstream news have the same one sided political agenda as the owner of the company. Many TV stations are owned by wealthy businessmen who have their own political agenda that the employees and journalists have to follow. Furthermore if they own other companies or brands they would have an interest in keeping their own business in good light. The Internet is not owned by any company, and everybody can freely participate in creating and sharing all kinds of media. Of course many news agencies see this as a threat of their own existence other news agencies see it as a opportunity of expansion. Many of these companies have interest in desecrating the free and open press. But how has the free open source media movement in the internet got a chance with big competing companies expanding their market to the internet? as we see it with websites like Youtube, Google, and many many more?:confused:

[Muzk]

The internet is free. The internet is free for companies to rule.

We don't just get random websites thrown at us; there are websites that are already mainstream. They show up first on google, etc. Like youtube, a huge consumerist fest. The "intelligent" side on youtube consists almost entirely of the right-wingers or liberals spreading their propaganda, or "funny" things... nothing against fun, but it sure as hell alienates people from the harsh reality

Then there's the connection between reality and the internet; there's advertisement about the internet on the TV and elsewhere. "Go here, do that, buy this."

Newspapers usually have webpages where people can read the news instead of buying a newspaper. Then the popular webpages are linked between each other, some kind of "traffic-exchange", forming the "mainstream"



I don't like my response but Tyrlop wanted me to post since noone wants to join his "discussion"...

Don't forget you pay to get access for the internet
Oh I know a hacker who steals internet.. but pssht

[Tzadikim]

The Internet, in its present form, isn't what's pertinent. What's pertinent is co-opting the OpenSource movement for our own aims.

[Tiktaalik]

Open Source should be supported by all radicals. The concept of Open Source should be what we're aiming for, at least within the technological realm.
That's not to say don't use Windows or Mac, but def support and understand GNU/Linux.

YouTube can be used for propaganda, so can email.
The thing is there seems to be a trend where some folks don't really organize or talk to ordinary people and just end up sending out articles or trash-talking on the internet.. which is all well and good but for some people, that's all they do.

Talking to people and explaining your position and challenging reactionary ones are more useful than any media or propaganda can ever be.

[Delegado J]

Open Source should be supported by all radicals. The concept of Open Source should be what we're aiming for, at least within the technological realm.
That's not to say don't use Windows or Mac, but def support and understand GNU/Linux.

YouTube can be used for propaganda, so can email.
The thing is there seems to be a trend where some folks don't really organize or talk to ordinary people and just end up sending out articles or trash-talking on the internet.. which is all well and good but for some people, that's all they do.

Talking to people and explaining your position and challenging reactionary ones are more useful than any media or propaganda can ever be.

I agree 100%, comrade. The open source movement has really put a dent in the profit of monopolies. Microsoft has really gone downhill, compared to their revenue in the 1990s.

The internet is already the largest data base for sharing information. Imagine what else we could do with it. Citizens could use it to vote on issues of local importance. Hell, the internet could be "the ballotbox" of the future.

[Tyrlop]

Interesting points. but can anyone give me a deep overview of what is going on between the Open Source movement and the companies that oppose them, many companies still see an opportunity in expanding to the internet east :trotski:

[Snakes]

Citizens could use it to vote on issues of local importance. Hell, the internet could be "the ballotbox" of the future.

Interesting documentary on this issue is: "Us now", you can find it on Youtube.

[punisa]

Interesting documentary on this issue is: "Us now", you can find it on Youtube.

It' a very interesting documentary and I too highly recommend it, but I do have some criticism.
Internet is still "hyped" about, especially since revolutionary web 2.0 - I personally see nothing that revolutionary about it, just fancy icons.
One would imagine that young people would become much more educated and knowledgeable on real issues such as politics, history, economics etc. I thought so too back in the early 90's when Internet was just starting up globally.

Eventually it didn't work out that way. Internet got flooded with nonsense and time wasters of all sorts (including probably 99% of web 2.0 crap) and many real "revolutionary" moments now take place in forms of facebook groups among the alienated and socially disconnected youth.

Social disconnection and trivial-ism on grand scale created a serious lack of real progressive actions.
As for Internet as the main source of knowledge, again I disagree. Majority of real knowledge I still find in books (and usually have to hunt them down :lol:)