Amateurs, Professionals and Transformation

One of the most fascinating discussions in a long time has been taking place in the Weblog corner of the Internet, where a new kind of communication is coming together into something we haven’t seen before.

Please read all of these postings before you continue:

  • Dave Winer: The Web is a Writing Environment.
  • Sean Gallagher: Hey Dave — You Pissed Me Off.
  • Deborah Branscum: When I grow up.
  • Dave Winer: A Challenging Time for the Pros.
  • Glenn Fleishman: Yeah, write.
  • Doc Searls: Make blove, not war. (You have to scroll down.)
  • Paul Andrews: The New New Journalism.
  • Dave Winer: Quoting Dead Presidents.

    (Have I missed any important postings? .)

    Some thoughts:

    In a recent book proposal, I said that one of the main implications of the growing global network will be the return of the “gifted amateur — the person who creates art for the sheer love of it.” Actually, the gifted amateurs do more than create art in our world. They are also the true believers in politics and other fields. They do things because they care. We need them, and the Net gives them a megaphone the likes of which they haven’t had had before.

    I don’t think it follows, however, that only amateurs can have integrity in what they do, or that Big Media is an anachronistic, stumbling entity, doomed to collapse. We in the traditional media do have a huge problem, which I’ve discussed here before. Our business model is not well-suited to the rise of the network, at least not in any way I can discern.

    I keep giving talks to journalists in which I explain, with a nod to the Cluetrain folks, that the practice of journalism is turning from a lecture to a conversation. This is good for us, I argue.

    A reporter wondered aloud about this at a recent talk. If everyone has equal standing in the conversation, he asked, how will we a) know who’s got it right and b) have time to read it all? Interesting questions.

    Maybe one kind of journalism will blend conversation and teaching. Ah. There’s a word for this — seminar. The first definition is about a professor and students, with the former guiding the latter. The next main definition is “a meeting for an exchange of ideas.”

    I think journalism can include both. I’m not the professor in this seminar, because I assume that my readers know more than I do. They tell me what they believe. Sometimes we disagree on the meaning of the facts. Sometimes (often) I learn about new facts that affect my thinking on a topic. Sometimes I am persuaded I was wrong.

    The Net has made all this possible to an unprecedented degree. It’s the result of “many-to-many” communications, the combination of every medium since the telegraph.

    Weblogs are a classic “many to many” format. They have a self-correcting nature that the traditional media don’t — can’t? — begin to emulate.

    When Trellix invested in Pyra to help keep Blogger going, I posted an item in this Weblog, and linked to the press release. I also linked to Dan Bricklin’s note on how the investment happened. Later on, Evan Williams posted his own take on the deal. As Dave Winer correctly notes, “In the Blogger-Trellix deal, we got first-hand personal essays from the two people who made the deal. Mark my words, this is a new artform. I expect to see a lot more of this in the future.” (Note that Dave’s piece drew a clarification from Paul Snively, which Dave promptly pointed out.)

    So where does all this head? I’m not that smart, not yet, anyway. But I know we’re heading somewhere valuable.

    Comments

  • This entry was posted in SiliconValley.com Archives. Bookmark the permalink.