Even two years ago it was impossible for me to imagine how anyone can control the Internet. I mean, TV, radio, and newspapers are those media sectors that historically were under someone’s control, be it government or businessmen. But Internet, as for me, was created not only for convenience in searching information or creating new data base, but also to fight with that information control and to give voices to voiceless. With the development of Independent Media it became even clearer that web is a “free of control” space for those, who have something to say. It seemed that people all over the world were “celebrating” the global holiday of freedom and total absence of control in the information flow. But as Internet becomes more popular, informative and influential, more and more people realize that having control in the web space is equal to having control in the whole media sector. And of course, if there is something as huge and global as Internet there will be always someone, who wants to own this “something.” Some governments chose the easiest way to control it – block all “dangerous” web-sites in the whole country, which basically destroys the whole idea and point of Internet existence. While people in the U.S.A. or E.U enjoy the total freedom of speech in the Web and talk about Independent Media every two seconds, citizens in china or Turkmenistan still can’t use the Internet for its primary purpose. We heard all the stories with Google in China, where it’s searching engine blocks all the Web-pages that go against Chinese government’s ideology. But we don’t understand that the main problem here is not about Google Company, but about the government that has total control in all the spheres of social life in China. Yes, Google could have resisted providing its service in China and left the country. In this case the whole “democratic” world would respect the Company, but what about China? What are all those people suppose to do? It’s easy to give an advice living in the U.S., but it’s not that easy to fight against the government in countries like China.
But blocking Web-sites is not the only problem. At&T idea of creating fast and slow lanes, with big companies paying extra money to move to the fast line is even more dangerous as it might affect all countries, including democratic America and Europe. Big conglomerates that already control broadcast media now realize that Internet is the next step. And this idea is not as crazy as it sounds and not as impossible as any of you might think. If those big corporations have enough money to buy media broadcast they definitely have enough money and creativity to find the way to control Internet. Will the Internet be divided into fast and slow? Will it be privatized by media corporations or controlled by the government? Will we still be able to write whatever we want on the blog in 20 years? Who knows? But what I know now is that Internet became too big and too important in the whole world to be unnoticed and untouched by those who have money and power.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
Who are you, Bloggers?
This question appears in the media again and again. Who are the bloggers? Journalists? Writers? Citizens or professionals? What rights do they have and what obligations? The online media developed so fast that a particular definition has not been found yet. Some might say that blogging is just an alternative journalism or “citizen” journalism with the same purpose and rights as “professional.” And it does make a lot of sense. Bloggers just like journalists write news stories, investigative reports, opinions, etc. In many cases bloggers act even more “journalistic” than journalists, covering significant issues ignored by the broadcast media. But at the same time it would be unfair to call bloggers journalists and to give them all the rights professional journalists have. By saying this I relay to the situation in Oregon, where Mark Bunster, the author of the political blog, tried to attend an executive session and was asked to leave. (http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/10/bloggers_might_be_excluded_fro.html.) Even though media is allowed to attend all the executive sessions in Lake Oswego City, as it found out bloggers are not considered to be professional journalists. Of course, the issue initiated many discussions and debates on weather bloggers can be considered as a media or not. And my answer is surprisingly…No. Although I consider myself as a big fan of independent media and maybe even a part of it (as I blog sometimes for school or my friends), I don’t think that bloggers should have the same rights as professional journalists. Just imagine if the press-conferences with politicians, musicians or any other important person would be open to everyone, who names him/herself a blogger or a citizen journalist. It would basically allow anyone to attend the event and automatically turn it into mess. It is hard to imagine the security measurements that would be required to control everyone and make sure that all important people are safe. And it doesn’t mean that bloggers are worse than professionals. I just don’t compare them to journalists at all. They are just different. Like dogs and cats. Both animals. Both beloved pets. But at the same time completely different.
Of course some of you would argue that information access should not be limited. Instead it has to be free and open to public. And I would say that it can happen only in a perfect world which doesn’t exist yet and probably will not in future. And it’s understandable. Journalists are the ones who open the information to the public, they are the platform for all public people. Yes, to some point they are the gatekeepers of the information flow. But think about it. You will see the same situation everywhere. With bank workers and doctors, lawyers and businessmen. They are all the gatekeepers of a particular information. And only they can decide whether to share it with the public or not. And the only thing the society can do is to trust all those people and to hope that they share all the important information they know.
But with the whole “bloggers as journalists” issue it is definitely more complicated. Yes, I do not consider them all as journalists. But at the same time some independent media outlets like Huffington Post or DemocracyNow deserve a right to be considered as a professional media. That’s why I think there should be a particular measurement of the whole blogosphere that would define whether the outlet can be considered as professional journalism or not. And still it is difficult to imagine how and what is even more important who will make this decsision? Well, that’s a good topic for the government to think about in order to avoid Oregon’s situation in future.
Of course some of you would argue that information access should not be limited. Instead it has to be free and open to public. And I would say that it can happen only in a perfect world which doesn’t exist yet and probably will not in future. And it’s understandable. Journalists are the ones who open the information to the public, they are the platform for all public people. Yes, to some point they are the gatekeepers of the information flow. But think about it. You will see the same situation everywhere. With bank workers and doctors, lawyers and businessmen. They are all the gatekeepers of a particular information. And only they can decide whether to share it with the public or not. And the only thing the society can do is to trust all those people and to hope that they share all the important information they know.
But with the whole “bloggers as journalists” issue it is definitely more complicated. Yes, I do not consider them all as journalists. But at the same time some independent media outlets like Huffington Post or DemocracyNow deserve a right to be considered as a professional media. That’s why I think there should be a particular measurement of the whole blogosphere that would define whether the outlet can be considered as professional journalism or not. And still it is difficult to imagine how and what is even more important who will make this decsision? Well, that’s a good topic for the government to think about in order to avoid Oregon’s situation in future.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Internet as a Big Sponsor
As for me, Internet was definitely the best invention of the past century. Just think about it. Nowadays we cannot imagine our life without web. Be it studying, working, shopping or talking to your friends, everything is connected to the internet. But this invention gave us much more than just convenience. It opened new doors for the flow of information, especially in the countries where freedom of speech is an unachievable good. Blogs, chat-rooms, and social network gave an opportunity for people to speak out and what is more important to stay incognito. In countries like Iran, Turkmenistan and China internet is the only platform for people to share truthful information and to initiate social changes in this way.
But freedom of speech is not the only issue that internet tries to solve. Funding also got more opportunities with the development of the web. William Booth in his article “His Fans Greenlight the Project – Robert Greenwald Tapped a new Funding Source: The Audience” (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/18/AR2006081800210_pf.html) mentions the story of Gim Gilliam, who raised funds for his movie on the internet. In the situation, when there were no sponsors for the project he was really interested in he turned to the web and…won. The story of Gim Gilliam is indeed not the only one in the past years, but one of many others. Internet became a great solution for those artists (be it movie makers, photographers or journalists) who don’t get a support from big sponsors and the only hope left for them is to ask people for donations. It’s unbelievable but it works and makes a perfect sense for me.
First of all, people are willing to pay money for someone they already know, like and what is more important trust. For example, when you buy New York Times you never know if you will satisfy your interest in one topic or another. You don’t know if the article written by some journalist will be enough funny or too funny, informative or based on rumors. But with internet and independent journalism you, as a “customer” of the product are able to choose your favorite journalist or writer and to follow his works constantly. That’s why when it comes to the point when either this journalist will write his or her article or not depends on YOU, it’s easier to donate money to someone you know and trust.
Second of all, the ability to donate money and get the project started makes people feel important and involved. Instead of observers readers become participants and it creates this significant feeling of importance and being a part of something huge and being a part of the community. It also unites people and makes them closer to each other. Because it is a great feeling to realize that you and thousands of people around you have the common interest and a willing to pay for satisfying your common need.
That’s why Internet is a powerful source. It gives an opportunity for starting artists or just someone, who has really good ideas but not supported by a big sponsor to make their projects going by simply asking people for money. And it is useful for both sides: creators and consumers. Because in this way people can choose the product they are really interested in and pay for it. In this way people interested in fishing or white bears in Alaska are actually able to unite and sponsor movies about their interests. And with the development of Internet, creators, who would never dream about getting $100,000 or even more are actually able to get those money from people interested in their projects.
But freedom of speech is not the only issue that internet tries to solve. Funding also got more opportunities with the development of the web. William Booth in his article “His Fans Greenlight the Project – Robert Greenwald Tapped a new Funding Source: The Audience” (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/18/AR2006081800210_pf.html) mentions the story of Gim Gilliam, who raised funds for his movie on the internet. In the situation, when there were no sponsors for the project he was really interested in he turned to the web and…won. The story of Gim Gilliam is indeed not the only one in the past years, but one of many others. Internet became a great solution for those artists (be it movie makers, photographers or journalists) who don’t get a support from big sponsors and the only hope left for them is to ask people for donations. It’s unbelievable but it works and makes a perfect sense for me.
First of all, people are willing to pay money for someone they already know, like and what is more important trust. For example, when you buy New York Times you never know if you will satisfy your interest in one topic or another. You don’t know if the article written by some journalist will be enough funny or too funny, informative or based on rumors. But with internet and independent journalism you, as a “customer” of the product are able to choose your favorite journalist or writer and to follow his works constantly. That’s why when it comes to the point when either this journalist will write his or her article or not depends on YOU, it’s easier to donate money to someone you know and trust.
Second of all, the ability to donate money and get the project started makes people feel important and involved. Instead of observers readers become participants and it creates this significant feeling of importance and being a part of something huge and being a part of the community. It also unites people and makes them closer to each other. Because it is a great feeling to realize that you and thousands of people around you have the common interest and a willing to pay for satisfying your common need.
That’s why Internet is a powerful source. It gives an opportunity for starting artists or just someone, who has really good ideas but not supported by a big sponsor to make their projects going by simply asking people for money. And it is useful for both sides: creators and consumers. Because in this way people can choose the product they are really interested in and pay for it. In this way people interested in fishing or white bears in Alaska are actually able to unite and sponsor movies about their interests. And with the development of Internet, creators, who would never dream about getting $100,000 or even more are actually able to get those money from people interested in their projects.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
