Dorris Lessing is the latest of a growing list of notable people who have spoken out against the internet, claiming in short that it makes us stupid. Another prominent example is the author Andrew Keen who argues first that user generated content (along with copyright infringement and the like) is undermining the business models that enable the production of quality content - content that is vetted by professionals. On the other side you have people like Lawrence Lessig who argues in defence of the cult of the amateur and the democratisation of content production. It’s interesting that the internet has produced such divergent interpretations of its contribution. Either it will liberate us from the elite culture makers, or it will doom us to a swill of endless mediocrity where we can’t tell fact from fiction. Either it will be the birth of a new democratic consciousness, or the end of consciousness itself. I’m not going to take a side in this particular debate. It is an old debate as I will point out in greater detail below. However, there is a manner in which the internet may provide for a genuine raising of consciousness, one which is continually overlooked by the pundits. It’s nature is not what you’d expect - and it certainly doesn’t rely on a wholesome belief in the goodness of the average human being.
A while back I wrote about the brave new revenue sharing world that is fast approaching. I argued that in order to infiltrate word of mouth distribution channels, companies would begin to share revenue with their services. I predicted that the result would be the total commodification of our social lives and I painted nightmare scenarios where we were paid to influence our friends, colleagues and loved ones for the sake of a share in the profit. I want now to explore the possible effects of this change on our day to day lives. To what extent will our private, social lives become an extension of a capitalistic process that begins with a marketing decision made by the board members of a corporation, or the political advisors to a demagogue? To what extent was this always the case? And what would be the danger to society were this to become the case? Might we lose something vital that protects society - that allows it to adapt in response to change?
Madness is ensuing over at Digg.
For those who don’t know what is going on, here is a brief history. Recently a hacker over at the Doom 9 forums figured out the processing key for the HD DVD format. This key means that effectively the digital rights management functions on such media are rendered neutered - so the information could then be copied, or played on unauthorised boxes (such as linux).
In my previous post on this subject, I claimed that the revenue sharing model would provide an income stream to the general public that has never previously been accessible before. The central idea behind this claim was that many common activities on the internet, such as posting links, and embedding videos, serve as distribution points for content. As this process replaces (at least in part) the traditional role of distribution, it provides real value to those that produce the content. Hence, there exists a natural rationale for the content producers to provide a monetary reward for this act of distribution. In this post, I want to examine some of the possible effects the involvement of the general public in this kind of process may have. While the benefits of this revolutionary change will be enormous, the potential cost will probably be just as profound. The language of the debate elevates quickly into that of hyperbole – where some are quick to claim that the very thing at stake is the human soul itself. What it certainly does point to is the very conflicted relationship we all have as individuals to the capitalistic system that determines the substances of our lives. The thesis I propose is this: that for the first time in the history of capitalism people will have the choice to either opt in, or out of one of the fundamental processes that drives it – resolving the conflict one way or the other for that individual. We will see how this will come about in the sections below.
We are on the precipice of a revolution - though it’s something of which we are scarcely aware. Part of our ignorance stems from its obscure potential, but revenue sharing will be something that will come to dominate the very minutiae of our lives -whether we like it or not. The idea, in a nutshell, is that all parties involved in shuffling traffic around this grand internet highway of ours will be given a cut in the revenue. At first glance this doesn’t seem like much of a big deal - but it will be the catalyst for massive social change. It will be the enabling condition for millions of ordinary people who suddenly gain access to an income stream that never existed before. But it will also be the cause of great social alienation - the likes of which we’ve never seen before. The question then, is how will we deal with it once it comes? How can we make the most of it as an opportunity - without selling our souls in the process? This will be the first in a two part post that examines first the nature of the revolution, and secondly the potential impact this will have on us as a society.
It will be a brave new revenue sharing world