Facebook killed the internet, and I'm
pretty sure that the vast majority of people didn't even notice.
I can see the look on many of your
faces, and hear the thoughts. Someone's complaining about
Facebook again. Yes, I know it's a massive corporation, but it's the
platform we're all using. It's like complaining about Starbucks.
After all the independent cafes have been driven out of town and
you're an espresso addict, what to do? What do you mean “killed”?
What was killed?
I'll try to
explain. I'll start by saying that I don't know what the solution
is. But I think any solution has to start with solidly identifying
the nature of the problem.
First of all,
Facebook killed the internet, but if it wasn't Facebook, it would
have been something else. The evolution of social media was probably
as inevitable as the development of cell phones that could surf the
internet. It was the natural direction for the internet to go in.
Which is why it's
so especially disturbing. Because the solution is not Znet or Ello.
The solution is not better social media, better algorithms, or social
media run by a nonprofit rather than a multibillion-dollar
corporation. Just as the solution to the social alienation caused by
everybody having their own private car is not more electric vehicles.
Just as the solution to the social alienation caused by everyone
having their own cell phone to stare at is not a collectively-owned
phone company.
Many people from
the grassroots to the elites are thrilled about the social media
phenomenon. Surely some of the few people who will read this are
among them. We throw around phrases like “Facebook revolution”
and we hail these new internet platforms that are bringing people
together all over the world. And I'm not suggesting they don't have
their various bright sides. Nor am I suggesting you should stop
using social media platforms, including Facebook. That would be like
telling someone in Texas they should bike to work, when the whole
infrastructure of every city in the state is built for sports utility
vehicles.
But we should
understand the nature of what is happening to us.
From the time that
newspapers became commonplace up until the early 1990's, for the
overwhelming majority of the planet's population, the closest we came
to writing in a public forum were the very few of us who ever
bothered to write a letter to the editor. A tiny, tiny fraction of
the population were authors or journalists who had a public forum
that way on an occasional or a regular basis, depending. Some people
wrote up the pre-internet equivalent of an annual Christmas-time blog
post which they photocopied and sent around to a few dozen friends
and relatives.
In the 1960's there
was a massive flowering of independent, “underground” press in
towns and cities across the US and other countries. There was a
vastly increased diversity of views and information that could be
easily accessed by anyone who lived near a university and could walk
to a news stand and had an extra few cents to spend.
In the 1990's, with
the development of the internet – websites, email lists – there
was an explosion of communication that made the underground press of
the 60's pale in comparison. Most people in places like the US
virtually stopped using phones (to actually talk on), from my
experience. Many people who never wrote letters or much of anything
else started using computers and writing emails to each other, and
even to multiple people at once.
Those
very few of us who were in the habit in the pre-internet era of
sending around regular newsletters featuring our writing, our
thoughts, our list of upcoming gigs, products or services we were
trying to sell, etc., were thrilled with the advent of email, and the
ability to send our newsletters out so easily, without spending a
fortune on postage stamps, without spending so much time stuffing
envelopes. For a brief period of time, we had access to the same
audience, the same readers we had before, but now we could
communicate with them virtually for free.
This, for many of
us, was the internet's golden age – 1995-2005 or so. There was the
increasing problem of spam of various sorts. Like junk mail, only
more of it. Spam filters started getting better, and largely
eliminated that problem for most of us.
The listservs that
most of us bothered to read were moderated announcements lists. The
websites we used the most were interactive, but moderated, such as
Indymedia. In cities throughout the world, big and small, there were
local Indymedia collectives. Anyone could post stuff, but there were
actual people deciding whether it should get published, and if so,
where. As with any collective decision-making process, this was
challenging, but many of us felt it was a challenge that was worth
the effort. As a result of these moderated listservs and moderated
Indymedia sites, we all had an unprecedented ability to find out
about and discuss ideas and events that were taking place in our
cities, our countries, our world.
Then came blogging,
and social media. Every individual with a blog, Facebook page,
Twitter account, etc., became their own individual broadcaster. It's
intoxicating, isn't it? Knowing that you have a global audience of
dozens or hundreds, maybe thousands of people (if you're famous to
begin with, or something goes viral) every time you post something.
Being able to have conversations in the comments sections with people
from around the world who will never physically meet each other.
Amazing, really.
But then most
people stopped listening. Most people stopped visiting Indymedia.
Indymedia died, globally, for the most part. Newspapers – right,
left and center – closed, and are closing, whether offline or
online ones. Listservs stopped existing. Algorithms replaced
moderators. People generally began to think of librarians as an
antiquated phenomenon.
Now, in Portland,
Oregon, one of the most politically plugged-in cities in the US,
there is no listserv or website you can go to that will tell you what
is happening in the city in any kind of readable, understandable
format. There are different groups with different websites, Facebook
pages, listservs, etc., but nothing for the progressive community as
a whole. Nothing functional, anyway. Nothing that approaches the
functionality of the announcements lists that existed in cities and
states throughout the country 15 years ago.
Because of the
technical limitations of the internet for a brief period of time,
there was for a few years a happy medium found between a small elite
providing most of the written content that most people in the world
read, and the situation we now find ourselves in, drowning in Too
Much Information, most of it meaningless drivel, white noise, fog
that prevents you from seeing anywhere further than the low beams can
illuminate at a given time.
It was a golden
age, but for the most part an accidental one, and a very brief one.
As it became easy for people to start up a website, a blog, a Myspace
or Facebook page, to post updates, etc., the new age of noise began,
inevitably, the natural evolution of the technology.
And most people
didn't notice that it happened.
Why do
I say that? First of all, I didn't just come up with this shit.
I've been talking to a lot of people for many years, and a lot of
people think social media is the best thing since sliced bread. And
why shouldn't they?
The bottom line is,
there's no reason most people would have had occasion to notice that
the internet died, because they weren't content providers (as we call
authors, artists, musicians, journalists, organizers, public
speakers, teachers, etc. these days) in the pre-internet age or
during the first decade or so of the internet as a popular
phenomenon. And if you weren't a content provider back then, why
would you know that anything changed?
I and others like
me know – because the people who used to read and respond to stuff
I sent out on my email list aren't there anymore. They don't open
the emails anymore, and if they do, they don't read them. And it
doesn't matter what medium I use – blog, Facebook, Twitter, etc.
Of course some people do, but most people are now doing other things.
What are they
doing? I spent most of last week in Tokyo, going all over town,
spending hours each day on the trains. Most people sitting in the
trains back during my first visit to Japan in 2007 were sleeping, as
they are now. But those who weren't sleeping, seven years ago, were
almost all reading books. Now, there's hardly a book to be seen.
Most people are looking at their phones. And they're not reading
books on their phones. (Yes, I peeked. A lot.) They're playing
games or, more often, looking at their Facebook “news feeds.”
And it's the same in the US and everywhere else that I have occasion
to travel to.
Is it worth it to
replace moderators with algorithms? Editors with white noise?
Investigative journalists with pictures of your cat? Independent
record labels and community radio stations with a multitude of
badly-recorded podcasts? Independent Media Center collectives with a
million Facebook updates and Twitter feeds?
I think not. But
that's where we're at. How do we get out of this situation, and
clear the fog, and use our brains again? I wish I knew.
For more on my feelings about technology more broadly, you might like to read something I wrote here in Songwriter's Notebook in 2013, Kill Your Computer -- Why the Luddites Were Right.
For more on my feelings about technology more broadly, you might like to read something I wrote here in Songwriter's Notebook in 2013, Kill Your Computer -- Why the Luddites Were Right.
5 comments:
Nicely stated. I have been thinking of newspapers going out of business, but I hadn't really thought of the cumbersome list that I joined and chatted up 15 years ago as something that was gone. I was thinking it had evolved, but after some thought, it is gone. The online chat room with the role play game? I hadn't really thought about that either. Probably gone.
All those tools are still there and usable. Why, I myself signed up for a listserv only yesterday, to join a discussion about learning to use open notebook techniques in science.
It's easy to confuse "the web" with "the internet." All the social networks have their own strengths and weaknesses, and, like you, I have no love for Facebook, but something better will be along in a minute.
If you are concerned about such issues, you can't duck taking responsibility for your own internet affairs, deepening your technical knowledge, maybe starting a co-operative to run your own server etc etc. Ask not what the internet can do for you...
Facebook today is largely what AOL was during what you term the golden age of the Internet. There is a population of mostly middle-age, mostly computer non-literate people who seem to literally believe that Facebook -is- the Internet, or at any rate who aren't comfortable exploring outside of it, which is sad, if nothing else because there are probably more scams running on Facebook than in the larger Internet.
HI, David, et al. A friend just forwarded this blog-post to me, and a few other folks. Interesting. While I am in my mid-sixties, I never did participate in the golden-age of list-serves (so I don't know what I am now missing). However, I still don't like what is available, and I think that the situation could be improved (even to the extent of being MUCH better than that yearned for yesteryear experience). I have thought about this a fair amount, but can only express the barest 'nub' herein. What I think should (and maybe could) exist are "local journalistic cooperatives" (working on local news, for the most part), which charge a small subscription fee. Such local co-ops are then networked to a worldwide system (of local co-ops), so people everywhere and anywhere can share the information. Eh?
Such a Nice and Informative Post. Thanks for Sharing
Pakistan Cargo Dubai
Post a Comment