The Line Between Competition and Obsoleteness

In “Here Comes Everybody”, Clay Shirky uses the term “mass amateurization” to define the process by which publishing barriers between experts and amateurs have been broken down as a result of new technology, particularly the internet. The advantage of having publishing tools that were only limited only to certain people and organizations with extensive financial means has disappeared with the advent of blogs, online videos and social networks. People no longer have to access news through print newspapers or television broadcasts—they can read commentary online posted by non-professional individuals or watch a video on Youtube. The ability to spread information easily no longer rests solely in the hands of professionals and corporations.
Mass amateurization has brought about many groundbreaking consequences that change cultural and technological functions in our world. As Shirky writes, the widespread publicity capabilities accessible to the public have not merely created a change in competition for traditional media sources but rather a change in the “overall ecosystem of information” (56). With the decline of traditional newspapers like The New York Times, it is clear that the way people choose to receive their information is changing to the point where the once relevant professional news sources may be rendered obsolete. Official news sources face a serious problem in that they cannot simply minimize the widespread effects of mass amateurization by finding new ways to compete with it—it is not about competition, it is about an absolute extinction of certain cultural traditions.
In addition, according to Shirky, even the very definition of “news” has changed as a result of mass amateurization. Prior to the creation of technological tools like the Internet, events that were “newsworthy” and “events covered by the press” tended to overlap because “what identified something as news was professional judgment” (64). Because there were only a limited number of news sources at that point, the decision of what events were considered culturally important was left to just a few professionals. But through blogs and independent online newspapers, virtually anyone now can present events that they personally consider to be relevant and this creates a vast number of choices when it comes to obtaining the news. An example of this divide between professional media and what is considered “news” is given by Shirky when describing Trent Lott’s comment at Strom Thurmond’s birthday party—one that was not considered worthy of press by newspapers but picked up by amateur bloggers who published it causing a media ruckus and accusations of racism that would go to damage Lott’s political career. Therefore, mass amateurization reduces the ability of traditional press to perpetuate an agenda setting process—what’s important is now what we, the average citizens, deem important.
A personal experience that exemplifies the phenomenon Shirky describes was the Youtube video of Iranian protestor Neda. I remember seeing a classmate post a link to the video on Facebook and as horrifying as the material was, it also illustrates how much power the ordinary citizen now has to raise awareness of political events and social causes that traditional media outlets may overlook. It is because of this video that Neda became such a martyr that the entire world came to know and how the 2009 Iranian elections became the focus of not only national, but international discussion. While official news sources may have avoided showing such a graphic video to minimize controversy, amateurs like the person who shot the video on his cell phone camera are not really bound by any set of rules or laws regarding the type of material they choose to post online—after all, such amateur publishing tends to be for no kind of financial profit. Thus, amateurs have publishing powers and freedoms that professional news sources cannot afford.
Taking all the effects of mass amateurization into account, it appears that the future of the media professional is highly uncertain, if existent at all. I believe that new technology will be only created and spread more rapidly with each generation and thus, ordinary people will obtain even better abilities to disseminate information. While right now, traditional news sources may have certain qualitative advantages like more professional writing, high-resolution photos, and better built websites, who’s to say that in a few decades, cell phone cameras will be recording in HD and the ability to create websites will become even easier than it is now? Traditional media are fighting a losing battle when it comes to mass amateurization—the growing presence of mass amateurization, and perhaps its ability to overtake professional news sources seems inevitable.

Photo Sources

1. Screenshot from Youtube

2. Canadian Broadcasting Centre