Web 2.0 -- Good Thing/Bad Thing?

I walked into the PDF speakers’ reception (at Google’s offices in Chelsea) with Andrew Keen, a digital dissenter. As presented in his soon-to-be-released Cult of the Amateur: how today’s Internet is killing our culture, Andrew’s theory is that Web 2.0 largely is rubbish, in that we’re not using the tools to build anything of value as much as we’re using the tools to tear down existing infrastructure (e.g., cultural, political, economic), merely to then shout about nothing within our own echo chambers. To Keen, Web 2.0 is a bunch of monkeys hammering away on keyboards.

It sounds like Keen oversells the point. Web 2.0 does some cool and beneficial things; I’ll highlight one successful community-building 2.0 application tomorrow. But, it’s worthwhile for each of us to consider whether our 2.0 activities are producing good things in the political realm. If 2.0 applications are primarily used solely to polish/enlarge the scale of doing the current crummy stuff in politics (like agitating the fringes and focusing more on “gotcha” than substance), they will only amplify the current crummy stuff that’s already out there. New boss same as old boss and all that. To the contrary, if the tools are being used to create meaningful dialogue (and perhaps action) within communities, that’s a different story.

To that end, I wish Jeff Jarvis would engage directly with Andrew. Both men are smart and articulate. It would hurt nothing to examine and re-examine whether new tools are being used in beneficial ways. Regarding culture, I had a nice conversation with Andrew about 2.0 introducing me to a band from his home town of Berkeley that I never would have found otherwise – Golden Birds – and how it’s not my problem or concern whether that 2.0 introduction helps displace established labels, critics, under-assistant west coast promo men, etc. Fortunately, he didn’t bite, kick or do anything to indicate that his dystopian position is militant.