Response for Thurs, Jan 15

While there are many undercurrents of themes throughout both readings and Andrea’s blogged response, it seems to me that the largest overarching theme is how we are using our technologies in relation to politics and activism.

 

The Howard Dean campaign may have been the first to utilize the digital tools at their fingertips to unite supporters, but it was never done as well or as famously as Obama’s recent campaign.  Andrea’s links to each politician’s websites and blogs really drives that point home.  Obama’s website consists of a plethora of links, blogs, responses, videos and information.  His promise of a transparent government is intertwined with technology in that the ability to rapidly publish a great variety of information through the internet allows his ideal to be possible.  Many see this as a giant step towards ideals - be it Habermas’ ideal public sphere or Ivan Illich’s ideal convivial society.  This is not say that we’ve come anywhere near reaching either ideal, rather as an observation that the general mood among Obama supporters is one of great hope and an overall sense of unity. 

 

In spite of these exemplary uses of technology, the majority of us are not really using it to its fullest potential.  (And, in Lovink’s opinion, are not as involved or informed as we should be regarding the basic architecture of those same technologies).   As Lim and Kahn note, “…the Internet is a convivial medium with a greater scope for freedom, autonomy, creativity, and collaboration than previous media.  To be clear, however, there is nothing inherent in Internet technology that automatically achieves this potential.” (p. 82).  Lovink is also decidedly pessimistic regarding the general public’s ability to organize themselves and use media to its fullest potential, and probably rightfully so. 

 

It’s unlikely that people will really use technology well until they understand it well, which I suppose explains both Boler and Lovink’s commitment to media activism.  The ways in which we choose to unite (ie through common causes like Obama’s campaign and presidency) and the ways in which we choose to challenge current standards and practices (ie the tension between bloggers and journalists and the potential for positive changes in our mainstream media) will really define this era.  Lovink belives we’re in a sort of technological renaissance - and if that’s true, then this era will be especially prominent in the timeline of our digital media and what we choose to do with it.

 

Last, because we’ve been talking and reading about Wikipedia in both books, here’s Michael Scott from NBC’s The Office explaining why Wikipedia is so awesome.