BENKLER

From Travis

Benkler's article seems to champion the social networked sphere mainly for it's facilitation of the individual's increased freedom in shaping something called the "information economy." Right. And because it was hard to find a straightforward, simply worded definition of this term in Benkler's article, I turned to Wikipedia (which I'm sure would delight Benkler?) and Wikipedia told me an information economy is "an economy with an increased emphasis on informational activities and information industry.  Ok, that makes sense. So it's an economy in which we value information--like facts, right? like stuff that we know? and this economy also values the actual methods themselves that allow information to be obtained and shared? I think that's right.

And Benkler is happy because, of course, a functional and quickly growing social networked sphere lets the individual contribute more to the development of this economy, this shared environment heavily emphasizing the values of information. Benkler further goes on to explain that the individual's greater level of personal contribution to the information economy is (in itself) a "dimension of individual freedom" (which, yeah sure, we have greater freedom to share/access information via the social network) which fosters "democratic participation" (ok sure, I can see that too).  But what really interests me is his assertion that this increased participation in the development of the information economy--and our subsequent individual freedom--also creates a medium that fosters "a more critical and self reflective culture" and "achieves improvements in human development everywhere" (p. 4)

That sounds like a pretty optimistic view to me.

Sure, I can certainly see instances in which we feel greater freedom because of the increased opportunities presented to us in the form of information consumption and sharing. Any time I disagree with someone and eloquently express myself in the powerful literary medium of the "youtube comment," I exercise my freedom to contribute to the information environment, just as in more scholarly settings I reap the benefits of the information economy when I am able to perform all of some type of research (for an essay maybe) in one physical location. From my computer.

So maybe this is what's so great about the internet/"social network sphere," and our constant consumption of and contribution to the information environment creates a more "critical and self reflective culture." Maybe because it is so easy for us to gain information about ANY SUBJECT WE WANT, we are thinking more critically, considering "things" on a deeper level, applying our gathering of information to some kind of active output in the "real world." Maybe because it is POSSIBLE for me to research all political candidates in an upcoming election for local officials I WILL ACTUALLY DO IT, and then I will be informed and be a real good voter and elect someone real good who is gonna do a real good job.

Except I won't do that. I'm not gonna look up those people. It's boring. (no offense if anyone is into any of that kind of stuff. because, yeah, it's totally important. I just don't care.)

And this is why I think Benkler's most important statement comes when he explains:

"There is no guarantee that networked information technology will lead to the improvements in innovation, freedom, and justice that I suggest are possible. That is a choice we face as a society." p 18

OMG that's like the truest thing evr. Because YEAH technology/information networks are AWESOME and they provide is with, like, a bajillion potential opportunities to use all that power for REAL GOOD STUFF (like doctors can share all their doctor-y stuff and cure so much more crap, and politicians can do all their politiciany things and make everyone super educated), but this is all just POTENTIAL. The medium itself doesn't guarantee these positive, altruistic usages. It's just as easy to use all that information, all this potential, for things that help nobody, and contribute nothing (apparently) significant.  

FOR EXAMPLE today I needed to write this blog thing, and so I started to write and look up some information and then OH HEY MICHAEL CERA THAT GUY IS LIKE SO FUNNY oh yeah that is really sad how ppl hate on him :( YEAH THEY SHOULDN’T DO THAT I GUESS THAT‘S TRUE--huh? Canadian superhero?--oh, ok but y’know, actually I din’t rlly like that Scott Pilgrim thing at all, I WONDER whyyyyyy, oh what? Bechdel test? OMG I CANT BELIEVE THERE ISNT A SINGLE SCENE IN BATMAN THE DARK KNIGHT WHERE TWO FEMALE CHARACTERS TALK TO EACH OTHER ABOUT SOMETHING NOT RELATING TO A MALE CHARACTER WHOA THAT DOESN’T SEEM RIGHT.

And for some reason (as interesting this whole excursion was for me, personally) I’m not sure how great or vital these specific sorts of benefits are.

And yeah, the social networked sphere can totally be employed as an element of individual freedom, fostering critical self-reflection, and achieving improvements in human development. And it definitely seems to do this, at least some of the time (maybe a lot of the time, I really don't know). But I think it is also possible--both on a personal level and on a greater scale--to squander that potential, combining all of our "informations" and coming up with nothing but noise. Or just nothing.

Travis Landhuis

(also, p.s.: I don't think that any one else's personal positive experience within the social network--especially social/community based--is invalidated by my skepticism about the validity of our ACTUAL usage of the social networked sphere versus the IDEAL usage. some deeply personal experiences can be born out of the context of a shared sense of "community" in any form, and these can be completely genuine and important for certain individuals based on their particular needs. my blog entry ignores the context of community and its relationship to the information economy (mostly because i have so many concerns with the very definition of community in its many fascinating permutations within the "online" information environment)).