First, I must say that the feeling of finally moving on from Jaron Lanier was amazing. No longer will I have to spend large amounts of time, browsing Google in an attempt to decode some of the shit he was talking about, throughout his book—I mean “Manifesto.” However, I must say that I did learn a few things from the book, such as the way humanity has begun to see technology as the ends of all means.
I was also able look at myself and question how technology has not changed only humanity but—me as an individual, I started to question whether or not my opinion things actually came from me or the majority did; it was from this that I was able to evaluate to what extent technology has affected my social life. In spite of this, I must admit that I will not be in a rush to read Lanier next book.
On a different note, after reading the article Power Laws, Weblogs, and Inequality, I was able to see the world of blogging in a different light. I never knew how hard it is for bloggers to get noticed, and even more interesting I did not realize how much a role one person plays in the success of a blog. This brings me to the quote
I chose that quote is because I feel it summed up everything that the article was talking about. I found it very interesting how the diversity and the choice of individuals can cause blogs to end up in a bell curve format; where the blogs that were at the top overshadowed the blogs that were just starting to get on the scene. The example of how one person can make a blog popular and overshadow other blogs focusing on the same topic was really interesting. However, I did not understand the part about “becoming a broadcast outlet, distributing material without participating in conversations about it.” Did it mean that more popular someone gets the harder it is to have a voice? If so it does not make any sense at all. Can someone please explain it to me?
I don't necessarily believe that the more popular someone gets the harder it gets for them to have a voice. I think that what that quote is saying is that they are this I guess for a lack of better words "A high and mighty voice". I think that this popularity removes them from having conversations about the material they distribute because everyone just see's that material to be the answer to whatever they are writing about. Does that make any sense? That is how I felt when I was reading it...
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ryan on this one. The message I took away from the article was that blog writers that are popular often possess a powerful voice as opposed to a weakened voice due to their collective following. However, in order to maintain that power, the writer cannot rest on a few smart posts-- they must constantly update and reinvent their blog to keep followers interested.
ReplyDeleteShane--be careful, the distribution Shirky describes is not a bell curve but a powerlaw (looks like an L).
ReplyDelete