Has the Internet stifled creativity? I think the answer is a resounding “No”, and I’d like to comment on the the piece that inspired this question, from the Op-Ed section of the Wall Street Journal.
Jaron Lanier’s article “Worldwide Mush” is an appallingly elitist and hyper-capitalist piece of drivel. I had to double take after reading it to make sure “Gordon Gekko” wasn’t the author. His argument that “internet collectivization” has stifled creativity and innovation on the Internet is chock full of so many loaded statements and false analogies that I’m surprised it got run in an esteemed publication. Oh wait, nevermind that publication was the Wall Street Journal. He points out that collectivizing Silicon Valley would be a bad thing, and then implies that the same conclusion holds true for certain things on the internet. But it doesn’t. He takes shots at Wikipedia; but here’s the irony: if you want to know who Jaron Lanier is you’re better off looking him up on the open Wikipedia rather than the closed Britannica. So the man who proclaims, “Most people know me as the “father of Virtual Reality technology”, isn’t even known by the most well known private encyclopedia.
Lanier makes the claim “There’s a dominant dogma in the online culture of the moment that collectives make the best stuff, but it hasn’t proven to be true.” He then uses Flash and the iPhone as disproof. Well Mr Lanier you are an electronic musician, so please explain to me how the monome, an open source interface made by a couple in New York, is one of the most sought after and innovative digital controller on the market. Explain to me why the open source Nexus One phone is just as well rated as the iPhone.
Lanier then claims that “There are only a tiny handful of writers or musicians who actually make a living in the new utopia [of demonetized sharing].” I once did a study a year or so where I found that there were more albums released by artists that were available in 2008, than in all of the 1960′s. So much for a handful. The internet has created an open environment where anyone can release music not just the handful that record execs deem good enough. Creativity has been encouraged, not stifled. Perhaps, Jaron is just bitter than his own albums don’t seem to sell so hot.
The author seems aware that his argument will be taken as hyper-capitalist, because he does his best to spin it to seem like he’s for the little guy. He even throws an anecdote about he dabbled in collectivism (how cute.) I love his statement “One of the bright spots in the employment picture for the U.S. is in health-care jobs. But the Japanese are developing health-care robots to anticipate the needs of their aging population. When those robots get good and cheap… a lot of health-care jobs in the U.S. will either go away.” Ya, sure, and the industrial revolution ruined the world economy.
Rather than have the best ideas contributed by anyone in society who feels like speaking up, he prefers those ideas be contributed by teams in privacy. Rather than have things be on a level playing fields, with no barriers to entry, and perfectly competitive, he wants the opposite. A world dominated by the elite. After all it would terrible if people did things for kudos, instead of PROFIT!!!! in Lanier’s world. The internet should be controlled by for profit teams of elites who of course have all our best interests in heart. This kind of Internet totalitarianism, this capitalist Stalinism, would be the biggest stifling of creativity.
Now, if I have a great idea, I can post it online for anyone to see, and I can CHOOSE to do it for free. I can also choose to make others pay. In fact I can choose to do whatever I want, and if it’s really good, and works, then the idea will spread. That my friends is creativity, and that is exactly what the Internet encourages.
Popularity: 1% [?]
Write a Comment