We The Media

            As I sit in front of my computer preparing to write another response paper for my #Jour 325 class, I really start to think about how privileged I am. Trigged by the first chapter of author Dan Gillmor’s We the Media,  I realized that American journalists and pretty much anyone else who wants to voice his opinion on a subject can do so freely and without concern of persecution by those in power or the government in general. Journalists and citizens in other countries do not experience this extent of freedom. A perfect example of this can be seen in the Iranian government’s attempts to suppress its citizens from expressing their opinions on a botched election via Twitter. Censorship by the Iranian government is a complicated topic, however the point here is that social networking in the form of Twitter played a role in the controversy.

            Web 2.0 has arrived. Gillmor’s desire for the web to be a writeable and not just readable realm is a reality for the children of Generation Y, which is the most digitally native generation the world has ever seen. The Web has truly grown to be a product that almost defines us as a generation. With the ability to post videos, essays, blogs, and pictures at any given time, Web 2.0 allows users to play an active part in the online community.

Gilmor writes, “Newspapers flourished during the 19^th century. The best were aggressive and timely, and ultimately served their readers well. Many, however, had litter concern for what we now call objectivity. Papers had points of view, reflecting the politics of their backers and owners” (Gillmor, 3). Web 2.0 also spurs objectivity because consumers are given access to many different opinions and thoughts which is something that Web 1.0 and print newspapers did not offer. In addition to giving people many different choices and opinions, consumers can directly comment on stories and postings which spurs discussions that would not have been available to previous generations.

Web 2.0 essentially shrunk the planet and initiated the concept of the world as a global village. I became familiar with the concept of the world as a global village in the Media and Society class that I took this past semester. The speed and accessibility of information, pictures, video’s and other forms of consumed media have turned the planet into an interconnected and ever-evolving community. Almost everyone can be found and contacted via Web 2.0;  images and information on distant countries and cities are instantly accessible with the simple click of a mouse.   

           

            One of the most beneficial creations of Web 2.0 comes with the concept of a wiki and primarily Wikipedia. “In just over three years of existence it has become a valuable resource and an example of how the grassroots in today’s interconnected world can do extraordinary things”(Gillmor, 148). Wikipedia works off of the model of user participation; anyone can access, edit and add information on the various sites and pages.

This fully embodies the purpose and concept of Web 2.0,

It defies first-glance assumptions. After all, one might imagine, if anyone can edit anything, surely cyber-vandals will wreck it. Surely flame wars over article content will stymie good intentions. And, of course, the articles will all be amateurish nonsense. Right? Well, not necessarily. The open nature of Wikipedia has been its greatest resource, and it has emerged as a credible resource. (Gillmore, 148)

 By allowing user participation, Wikipedia pages tend to be very natural and unbiased even on very controversial subjects, as it gives both sides of an issue the opportunity to post information. To fit it into context of the global village, students in Australia can view and edit the same information that students in America can. Wikipedia is a digital library at the center of a digital village that billions have to which billions have access.  Expanding the concept of the global village and the “read and write web”, people no longer have to go to one central location to access news or information. Children of Generation X had only three primary ways to access current and breaking news: the newspapers, radio and television, while Generation Y has the web. This provides them with copious amounts of ways to access the same information at a faster rate. Almost all of the information I hear about current events and issues comes from the Internet. More often than not, my friends inform me about these things rather than the media outlets themselves, which ultimately is the purpose of the read and write web. Social networking sites become a way to disseminate information in ways different than professional media outlets.

            Gillmor’s vision is now a reality, Web 2.0 and the various forms of new media that are arising with it definitely have the ability to cause social change. The average person now has more power then ever to influence others. For example, I set up a blog in less then five minutes and now I can use it to freely say whatever I please to the viewing world. I am not the only one getting out and doing things like this. This ease of access is enabling people to cover events that previously would have been deemed far too unimportant for major media outlets to cover. But now these issues are being brought to the proverbial table and people are starting to act upon them. Regular citizens of Generation Y have far more power to cause change then any other generation because now everyone has a voice. This can even be seen with in the title of Gillmor’s book WE the Media; the media is now us. We no longer rely on others to provide us with something that we are fully capable of creating ourselves. We are now moving and creating the news as a society and a global village, however this has the ability to cause its own unique problem, a problem to which we act simultaneously as the solution. Eventually many media outlets and reporters are going to become extinct. But maybe that is a change that we need. The scribes gave way to the printing press and the printing press gave way to the Internet. Who is to say that journalists will not give way to the people?