Digital Maoism

[jason]

Ex-Lemmingworks. ##.

My friend gary sent me Jaron Lanier’s article Digital Maoism:

The hive mind is for the most part stupid and boring. Why pay attention to it? The problem is in the way the Wikipedia has come to be regarded and used; how it’s been elevated to such importance so quickly. And that is part of the larger pattern of the appeal of a new online collectivism that is nothing less than a resurgence of the idea that the collective is all-wise, that it is desirable to have influence concentrated in a bottleneck that can channel the collective with the most verity and force. This is different from representative democracy, or meritocracy. This idea has had dreadful consequences when thrust upon us from the extreme Right or the extreme Left in various historical periods. The fact that it’s now being re-introduced today by prominent technologists and futurists, people who in many cases I know and like, doesn’t make it any less dangerous.

I’ve always found this guy to be problematic. But I’ve never read enough to consider myself well versed on the topic of his ego to say anything. In this context, we’re talking about wikipedia and how it is upsetting to some peeps. It reminds me of when I was presenting at SXSW in 2003. You didn’t miss much, and few were interested in hearing me talk about the cultural hegemony of blogging and the net in general. What was interesting was hearing how upset the people who made $$ off selling their words and ideas were to an online consumer market. If everyone started blogging, where would WE (i.e. the jokers writing content) be? Text is the turf of the journalist, writer, publisher and librarian. And if just ANYONE gets to write, the blogosphere [sic] will just get filled up by the idiot ramblings of non-professionals (i.e. readers) who should be consuming out quality rather than producing dross. Yawn. They all have blogs now and compete with the plebes.

Now for the world of wikipedia. In a moment. As an academic for almost 20 years, I can tell you where i find poor scholarship and errors in fact and argument and judgement: in published books and academic peer reviewed articles. Of course there’s a lot of great stuff in published books and academic peer reviewed articles, but there’s a lot of junk, and the quality control can be rather poor. AND the amount of useless drivel that gets into print can obscure the material of value. And as for the cabals that control the gate; I think that hive mind might be appropriate. Driven by vainglory, the tenure track or the dollar the good can be overwhelmed by the bad. I’m not trashing the field, but rather showing that it is not a great good place, but a normal place full of normal things that go on throughout the world.

Now for the world of wikipedia. It’s pretty much the same. It seems to accurately reflect what goes on outside of the world. Stupid articles on people we don’t care about, topics that don’t interest us and the like; disproportionate to important things. Issues relating to children and minority issues get overlooked and pages on geeks and geekery overblown.

Lanier points out that this notion of collectivism is a problem, but it is no more collective than the collective energy of the USA leads it to reproduce itself, and export it. No more collective than the hive mind of corporate america, or the ecologies of our global societies. Wikipedia is not a collective in any meaningful sense any more than a watershed or microclimate is maoist. It is a socially constructed space that is, for a change, useful. And wonderfully free of the rampant individualisms and cults of personalities that to me reflect maoism when you look at it.

Comments

[roger-kuin.livejournal.com]

Applause, applause. Wikipedia (and by extension, the Web, which is currently also getting trashed a fair bit) has become an indispensable tool for people who need to find information on lots of odd things, fast. If you can do it in several languages, all the better, for Wikipedia exists in all sorts of tongues.
When I first came to North America, longer ago than I care to remember, you could NOT get a good cup of coffee in any public venue. Donut shops did better than most, but it was still what the French call 'sock juice'. So everyone who actually liked coffee applauded those neat kids from Seattle. And drank their coffee. And liked the shabby armchairs of their coffee shops, where you could read the paper in more comfort than in Second Cup.
BUT: everybody liking their product made them -- O horrors -- shhhh -- SUCCESSFUL. And now it has become de rigueur to HATE St*rb*cks. To me (but maybe I'm full of latte) the parallels are obvious.
As for scholarly books, yes, they do contain mistakes. But both they and Wikipedia have (different) systems for minimising these. What one should beware of is the profusion of un-reviewed AND non-wiki websites which cut and paste from others of their ilk and give the same historical figure anywhere up to five different birthdates.

[complicittheory.livejournal.com]

yarrrr!

Well put. I never liked St*rb*cks cept to say that they improved the quality of coffee over all. I like your point of "(different) systems for minimising", and that the danger is sites that have no quality control... like new sites :)

Btw, our girl sarah's wiki page on saint sarah is now the internet standard on the issue. Scary.

I agree.........

[dracschick.livejournal.com]

I love wikipedia:)

Re: I agree.........

[complicittheory.livejournal.com]

share the love! nice fangs btw. hope the move went well

actually..........

[dracschick.livejournal.com]

I haven't moved yet. M-day is next Sat. I've never moved before so it should be um...an experience.

PS--Icon is Evey from "V", done by my flist buddy hysteriagalore. I write "V" fanfic, with both of them as vampires:)

Re: actually..........

[complicittheory.livejournal.com]

I don't know what V is, but it is best if I don't know. As for the move. I've done it too many times to remember, though I moved here last year, and the previous move was 1990. Even though we moved 1.9 km, it was a pain. You'll get through it. Moving is all about power and control issues. And broken pottery :)

I agree and I pretty much like to be in control so........

[dracschick.livejournal.com]

it's driving me more than a little nuts at the moment:(

PS--Not too worried about breaking things. Most of my valuables are books:)

Re: I agree and I pretty much like to be in control so........

[complicittheory.livejournal.com]

Books? never have them in my house!!! Stinky things. :)

Just finished reading inkspell. Don't know if you read young fiction, but it was great. I don't know what I'd do if I lost my books... got a pile of firsts and old editions that should be in a vault, if I could stand to be apart from them.

You sure are a strange physics teacher.

I almost was an English major........

[dracschick.livejournal.com]

I wanted to be a writer. But, I came from a blue-collar family (first in my family to go to college) and did very well in all my subjects. I thought that a technical degree would help keep me employed. But I write in my spare time and I'd trade it all to write full-time:)

PS---I feel for you that you moved so often.......

[dracschick.livejournal.com]

Besides my dissertation and my father's death, this experience ranks third in the most difficult things I've experienced/done in my life.

Re: PS---I feel for you that you moved so often.......

[complicittheory.livejournal.com]

I can understand. For me it was passing high school. Moving is habit forming... hope you don't get to enjoy it too much :)

PS

[dracschick.livejournal.com]

thanks for your support and well-wishes though. They are much appreciated during this difficult time.