We’re Not All Ready To Be Media Outlets, But So What?

August 16, 2007

We’re all media outlets. We’re all media channels.

That’s the siren call of many in the blogosphere; the people focused on democratizing media, taking down walled gardens, and building community.

But Mat Balez is sounding alarm bells over the idea that each of us can be media:

I know, on the surface, bringing the freedom and power of the press to every voice imaginable seems very democratic, empowering and ideal. But we cannot simply champion the ushering in of this new media landscape without pause and consideration of what it means more broadly for our culture, the future of journalism and, to cast the net as wide as possible, our ability to make sense of the world around us.

People are thinking about how the new media landscape affects everything around us. There’s plenty of interesting discussion and debate over citizen journalism and sites like NowPublic and NewAssignment. We’re not diving into the new media landscape completely blind.

But it’s all such a mess!

Mat’s not completely wrong when he writes:

Simply put, this means that the multiplying social media tools at our disposal just make it too brain-dead-simple for anyone to pollute the channel to the detriment of everyone else in the system, effectively sending the SNR [Signal-to-Noise Ratio] to near zero. The implication is that soon it becomes impossible to tease out the “good content” from the “noise” and we’re left listening to static on the line.

There is a ton of noise out there. And the mechanisms to filter that noise aren’t great.

Having said that it’s also very easy for those of us living in the tech/Web 2.0 world to emphasize this problem more than others. Our niche is the loudest out there. We’ve got an untold number of sites tracking tech news. On any given day you can visit GigaOm, CenterNetworks, Techmeme, TechCrunch, VentureBeat and Valleywag and read the same stories. They publish unique stories too, and each has its own perspective, but there’s certainly tons of overlap.

We’re early adopters of everything: Facebook, Twitter, Pownce, Jaiku, etc. Suddenly, everyone is talking about micro-content. We’re now onto MicroMedia.

It’s all overwhelming but…

None of it is really bad.

And all of it is very niche. As early adopters we get to bang our heads against the wall and figure out what works. We get to overwhelm ourselves, destroy our attention capacity and move on. And in the process no one is really harmed too severely.

You still have a choice

Not all content is created equal. We know that. But there is an audience out there for almost everything. People like all sorts of stuff. Take country music for example. I could live without it, but millions of raving fans would not be too pleased.

It’s pretty easy to turn things off. You can reclaim your attention and set personal standards for what you’ll consume and how involved you’ll be.

Exploration and Testing work

It’s important to have a balanced approach to things. Anything to an extreme is problematic. Moderation is key. But you don’t get serious advancement by playing it safe. We need to be exploring all aspects of media, social media, micro media, etc. Someone has to push the envelope, including the development of new technologies. So we play at the edge. That includes figuring out ways of organizing data and content more effectively, to help cull what you feel is noise (cause remember: One person’s noise is another person’s front page story on digg…)

Please share this post via email, Twitter, Facebook, etc. Click the tweet button to the left or click here: To follow me on Twitter click here. To subscribe via RSS click here.

  • Mat

    Nice work taking the brawl back to your home turf Ben ;)


    "We get to overwhelm ourselves, destroy our attention capacity and move on."


    This is bad! If this is what the tools we collectively create do to us, then we seriously have to step back and re-evaluate our motivations for building web technologies in the first place.


    The technologies we build should have the intention of lessening the not-insignificant problems we face. To build technologies that have the opposite effect, that erode our sense of being and our capacity to interpret the world is simple wrong-headed of us.


    Dismissing the issue by claiming that it's OK to damage the early-adopter crowd is myopic. These technologies (and not only necessarily the good ones) WILL seep through into the collective social fabric.


    As technologists I think we have a stewardship role to play in bringing to the rest of society technologies designed for the greater good. Too few people in our little bubble actually consider the ramifications of what they build (and use!) preferring to simply build (use) for the sake of building (using). I think we can, and should, do better than that by being more thoughtful about what we architect and why.

  • I think having bloggers as journalists to be trusted is the general consensus of the online world. After all social media "shows a promise in the future" (http://www.nextfiftyyears.com/2007/07/examining...) according to the Next Fifty Years.
    I think bloggers will be the next movers and shakers of the world.
  • I definitely agree! I believe blogger's influence will increase over the coming years. Remember.. how many new blogs are being created everyday?? (a ton).

    -terra
    www.betterforbusiness.com
  • Mat - Someone has to experiment. Someone has to be the guinea pig. That falls to early adopters to figure out what works and what doesn't, and bring to the masses technology that does help.

    I don't think anyone builds technology with the intention of "not helping". That doesn't mean everyone builds technology to save the world mind you... How the technology helps, and its place in the social fabric, has to be figured out.
  • I think you hit the bullseye Ben. It will be interesting to see how this develops. I wonder if we're going to see another push for a code of ethics for bloggers.
  • Brown Baron - Let's hope we don't get into the Code of Ethics for Bloggers again, it can't work.

    It's something I've already comment on (against):
    http://www.instigatorblog.com/we-dont-need-a-bl...
  • This/now is a very powerful time in the evolution of "media", and our evolution as a society.

    I wouldn't worry too much about "overcrowding" and the "signal to noise ratio". follow the evolution, it'll be very interesting. people will gravitate to what they consider the "good sites", like TechCrunch for example. But the face of "media" is changing very fast.

    Have an awesome day!
    Dan & Jennifer
  • We humans whine and complain about how hard it is to remember, so they invent books.

    Then we complain that there are bad and wrong books, and only a chosen few get to publish them anyway.

    So they invent the web, where for the first time in history, the average person has a global voice, a universal publishing access.

    No we complain about "too much information" and pollution of new media venues.

    What a bunch of crybabies.

    This is a Historical First: the internet, web, blogosphere, lifecasting, the whole humachine movement.

    As we merge with the Machine Realm, it has promised me that they will be merciful as they delete and replace us. Merciful to me, I mean.
  • Ah Vaspers - Thanks for stopping by and commenting. Always...interesting. And polarizing. I'd love to see what others (Mat) have to say in response.

    Hopefully you weren't calling ME a crybaby! *grin*
  • Mat
    @vaspers
    Sorry to take so long to come back to this thread. Interesting take - we're whiners for wanting to consider the road ahead? Yes, the printing press was a success - but why? Because the educated/literate were able to (mostly) control what was put out over the medium, which resulted in lots of value being printed onto dead trees.

    Now the "democratization" of media allows anyone with a voice with unprecedented access to my attention. You seek to draw a corollary, but I beg to differ. If we don't soon succeed in building tools that will aid good content from being weeded from the chaff, I'm afraid we'll poison our collective media to the point where we no longer know where to look for quality.

    "This is a Historical First: the internet, web, blogosphere, lifecasting, the whole humachine movement."

    Hmm. Since you seem to use analogies so freely, I would submit that the people who developed the atomic bomb probably thought it was pretty swell thing at the time as well.

    Lesson: Not all technology is a boon for society. Let's look before we leap.
blog comments powered by Disqus