Activist networks - No More Neutrality

Versione Completa   Stampa   Cerca   Utenti   Iscriviti     Condividi : FacebookTwitter
thecutter
00sabato 26 maggio 2007 09:37
Opinions on Wikipedia-type networks
In this article peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2007/05/activist-networks-no-more-neutral... Lovink and Rossiter make an argument against the "enforced democracy" of Wikipedia-type instruments, where "balance" and neutrality (lack of bias) are not positive goals for activists to engage in. Rather than utilising resources and energy to "reach a balance of views" on any given argument, they propose radical research. I find these particular quotes interesting:


The borders of networks comprise the "'non-democratic" element of democracy' (Balibar/Mezzadra). This insight is particularly helpful when thinking 'the political' of networks, since it signals the fact that networks are not by default open, horizontal and global. This is the mistake of much of the discourse on networks. There is no politics of networks if there are no borders of networks. Instead of forcing 'democracy' onto networks, either through policing or installed software, we should investigate its nature. This does not mean that we have to openly support 'benevolent dictatorships' or enlightened totalitarian rule. Usually networks thrive on small-scale informality, particularly in the early existence of social structures.



and


There are no citizens of the media. Find and replace the citizen with users. Users have rights too. The user is not a non-historical category but rather a system-specific actor that holds no relationship to modernity's institutions and their corresponding discourse on rights. What is needed, then, is total reengineering of user-rights within the logic of networks. As much as 'citizen journalists', liberal democratic governments, big media and global institutions are endlessly effusive about their democratic credentials, organized networks are equally insistent in maintaining a 'non-democratic' politics. A politics without representation - since how do networks represent anything? - and instead a non-representational politics of relations. Non-democratic does not mean anti-democratic or elitist. It has proven of strategic importance to loosen ties between 'democracy' and 'the media'. Let's us remember that the citizen journalist is always tied to the media organs of the nation-state. Networks are not nations. In times of an abundance of channels, platforms and networks, it is no longer necessary to claim 'access'. The democratization of the media has come to an end. People are tired of reading the same old critique of NYT, CNN and other news outlets that are so obviously Western and neo-liberal biased. It is time to concentrate our efforts on the politics of filtering. What information do we want to read and pass on?



Any thoughts on this?
Shaukat
00sabato 26 maggio 2007 15:20
Wikipedia was created by Jews and has done a good job on the agenda for which it was created.....distortion of historical events to serve Zionists' (mostly Jewish) dream of the New World Order (NWO) under Jewish domination. Here is an example:

judicial-inc.biz/der_showitz_misogynists_and_apartheid_is...
thecutter
00sabato 26 maggio 2007 15:40
who created it is irrelevant
I think, anyway, unless there was a set political agenda. I haven't checked the link you put in yet, but will do.

I believe the problem intrinsic to Wikipedia and other things similar to it (of which there is a plethora) is that they insist upon "objectivity". I believe that as humans, we are incapable of being objective, and therefore, especially with "hot" issues such as political ones, there is no such thing as "equal time", at least, it isn't fair to allow the occupier the same dignity as the occupied, the oppressor to the victim. Balance is something that these sources insist upon. For every opinion, they seek some kind of moderate middle ground. That this demands the watering down of views that contain bias (and are therefore human) Users of this are given a lot of "democracy", but it is worthless if they are being withheld information.

Again, the efforts made to keep up these middle roads seem to take away from the efforts better spent learning more, spreading the information we have. It seems to me a massive time waster, and hearing it from these academics in communications strategy simply adds to this feeling I already have.
Questa è la versione 'lo-fi' del Forum Per visualizzare la versione completa clicca qui
Tutti gli orari sono GMT+01:00. Adesso sono le 08:53.
Copyright © 2000-2024 FFZ srl - www.freeforumzone.com