Re: [-empyre-] video killed the radio star
On Jun 15, 2005, at 3:57 PM, Chris Ashley wrote:
I think this is a really good point, and one worth
acknowledging and repeating. Don't confuse the tool's
current application with its potential. There was the
early dream by some of the web's democratizing
capability- that citizens will be more involved and
empowered. If that was the case George W. would not
Indeed. I was working at Macromedia from 1995 - 1998 doing tech support
for FreeHand, fontographer, and then Dreamweaver. When they first
acquired the engineers for Dreamweaver and I was trained on how to
support it, I thought it was amazing - kind of like "Quark Xpress" for
the web. Then at a company-wide shindig at Pajaro Dunes Resort, (those
were the days....) in between massive all night drinking binges, we
actually got together in groups and discussed the products etc. I'll
never forget my supervisor's look when we were talking about
Dreamweaver - he had a great smile, as he thought "A great
democratisation - everyone will be able to make a web page - oh the
then his eyes widened, and he said
"oh, the horror...EVERYONE will make a webpage..."
and sure enough: within months a million pictures of pets were scanned,
record collections listed, etc. Oh. The Horror.
But then, I was on a list that shut down not long ago because the topic
of conversation for a week was "List all the crap on your desk". The
List Owner threw a fit and killed the list. I thought it was kind of
The web has leveled the playing field
for easy entry, but the discipline of practice and the
place of the author filter out the good from the bad.
I dunno. I tend to think people find an audience or vice versa. Good or
bad - I dunno - depends on the audience I suppose. Discipline is a
means to an end and not an end in itself - but practice is a good thing
as it creates consistency. I think the author gains more from a
practice than the audience.
blogs m.body a perspective of elementary content
alteration in a melange of
communication dynamics driven/governed by economic
rationalism + blanket
I would like some elaboration on that, myself. It sounds intriguing,
but has a scent of philological obscurantism + blanket reductionism...
And Nietzsche's idea that truth depends on our
Hmmm- so then solipsism is the only verifiable truth structure?
Somehow, I don't think you'd agree with that, but it's a risk of
relativist arguments going back to - oh jeeepers - a long way.
Besides - Nietzsche was crazy.
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and