When media is changing, also societies and personal lifestyles reorganize. This sentence borrowed by – I believe – Walther Benjamin may apply again now. Web 2.0 has brought up a new media ecosystem with social networks, UCG and search as new key elements. People more and more organize their social life through online and mobile (!) media. How does this reflect on sociological patterns?
Author and NYT-editor John Markoff gives an interesting insight in his new book comparing the 60ties counterculture to the creation of the Sillicon Valley and PC industry. The book is called “What the dormouse said: How the 60s Counterculture Shaped the Personal Computer”. Now Tim O’Reilly referring to John’s book analyses the web 2.0 culture and sees parallels to the 60ties values (thanks to Steffi and Johannes for this link):
“… I was struck by how often the way pundits and folks interviewed used the same adjectives and metaphors to relate their drug experiences as we often hear to used describe the potential of software and the internet: mind expanding / mind blowing; connecting with everyone; global consciousness; new colors and shapes; combining music, colors and movement (i.e., animation); insiders vs. outsiders; the importance of play; ambivalence towards material wealth; etc.
Especially the section that focused on the 60's seemed to capture the same utopian euphoria I'm hearing in the current technology environment (and what I heard during the first boom). Besides the use of mind-blowing adjectives, four themes spanned 60's drug taking and the current technology wave: connecting to everyone (in some type of lovefest context); there are people who get it and people who don't; multi-media helps define what's happening; and, that everything will be different now (in an undefined way). “
Media is entrenched into our personal and collective lifestyle and values. Just look at the neo green movement which is driven by media, too. There seems to be a collective mindshift towards issue-driven networks which emerge parallel to institutional settings, e.g. the rise of the Gates Foundation as a key driver in the global health agenda. Individuals can move issues as they could never before, the new media ecosystem facilitates finding allies, getting linkage, raise resources. Epinominous author Paulo Coelho recently stressed this power of the individual (or groups) at a dinner discussion. Yet there are other ways to see this. (And we had a good discussion which Loretta Würtemberger and Bruno Guissani). Is there a risk of a sort of “neo-platonism” where individuals which access media (and capital) setting agendas beyond political legitimation? Well, personally I do rather see the upsides.
Who are the new sociologists who explain what happens? Every time needs new interpretations. I would be interested.
I agree Marcel: Agenda setting beyond political legitimation is not the problem. Media are something like a processor to practice an international civil society in defending human rights issues. Media are freedom and democracy messengers. Enlightment is the key! With risk and chance...
Posted by: Till Weishaupt | July 11, 2006 at 06:17 PM