Tag Archives: Clay Shirky

Early web influencers

Posted on by

My blog clean-up project (ongoing) reminded me of these early-web influencers (for me). Some of these folks are still around but most are no longer the “stars” they were in the early days. Link to my posts below. (Descriptions by GPT 4o)

Visionaries, Theorists, and Futurists

  • Bruce Sterling – A science fiction writer and cyberpunk pioneer who explored the social and cultural implications of digital technology.
  • Clay Shirky – An influential thinker on Internet culture, crowdsourcing, and the power of decentralized networks.
  • Douglas Coupland – Coined “Generation X” and explored the cultural impact of digital technology in novels and essays.
  • Douglas Rushkoff – A media theorist who wrote about cyberculture, the social effects of technology, and digital optimism.
  • Kevin Kelly – Founding editor of Wired and a deep thinker on how technology shapes society and the future.

Journalists and Media Analysts

  • Dan Gillmor – A pioneer in citizen journalism, advocating for the participatory nature of news in the digital era.
  • Jeff Jarvis – A media critic who has been vocal about how the Internet disrupts traditional journalism.
  • Steven Levy – A tech journalist who chronicled the history of computing and the rise of the digital age.
  • Steve Outing – An early advocate for online news, exploring how journalism adapted to the Internet.
  • Terry Heaton – A television executive who recognized the shift from traditional media to digital platforms.

Tech Pioneers and Web Innovators

  • Chris Pirillo – Founder of Lockergnome, one of the earliest online tech communities, helping people understand software and the web.
  • Dave Winer – A key figure in the development of blogging, RSS feeds, and podcasting technology.
  • David Weinberger – Co-author of The Cluetrain Manifesto, which framed how businesses should adapt to the Internet age.
  • Doc Searls – Another Cluetrain Manifesto author, emphasizing user empowerment and open-source principles.
  • Jakob Nielsen – The godfather of web usability, setting foundational principles for user-friendly web design.

Marketing and Culture Shapers

  • Halley Suitt – A prominent blogger and voice in the early blogosphere.
  • Hugh MacLeod – Known for his “gapingvoid” cartoons and commentary on creativity and business.
  • Mark Ramsey – A key voice in digital radio and podcasting strategy.
  • Scott Adams – Creator of Dilbert, which captured the absurdities of tech and office culture.
  • Seth Godin – A marketing guru who popularized permission-based marketing and how digital culture changes business.

Entrepreneurs and Digital Business Minds

  • Mark Cuban – Made his fortune selling Broadcast.com to Yahoo, later becoming a major figure in sports and media streaming.
  • Nikol Lohr – Less widely known, but active in early online DIY culture and communities.

There’s No Such Thing As A Protest Vote

Posted on by

In 2016, (the U.S. electoral system) will offer 130 million or so voters just three options:
A. I prefer Donald Trump be President, rather than Hillary Clinton.
B. I prefer Hillary Clinton be President, rather than Donald Trump.
C. Whatever everybody else decides is OK with me.

That’s it. Those are the choices. All strategies other than a preference for Trump over Clinton or vice-versa reduce to Option C.

Clay Shirky: There’s No Such Thing As A Protest Vote

The Political Power of Social Media

Posted on by

The excerpts below are from an essay by Clay Shirky, Professor of New Media at NYU and author of Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age. The essay was published in 2011 but remains as relevant as today’s headlines (okay, more relevant than that).

One complaint about the idea of new media as a political force is that most people simply use these tools for commerce, social life, or self-distraction, but this is common to all forms of media.

The more promising way to think about social media is as long-term tools that can strengthen civil society and the public sphere.

In a famous study of political opinion after the 1948 U.S. presidential election, the sociologists Elihu Katz and Paul Lazarsfeld discovered that mass media alone do not change people’s minds; instead, there is a two-step process. Opinions are first transmitted by the media, and then they get echoed by friends, family members, and colleagues. It is in this second, social step that political opinions are formed. This is the step in which the Internet in general, and social media in particular, can make a difference. As with the printing press, the Internet spreads not just media consumption but media production as well — it allows people to privately and publicly articulate and debate a welter of conflicting views.

Little political change happens without the dissemination and adoption of ideas and opinions in the public sphere. Access to information is far less important, politically, than access to conversation. Moreover, a public sphere is more likely to emerge in a society as a result of people’s dissatisfaction with matters of economics or day-to-day governance than from their embrace of abstract political ideals.

“The conservative dilemma” — The dilemma is created by new media that increase public access to speech or assembly; with the spread of such media, whether photocopiers or Web browsers, a state accustomed to having a monopoly on public speech finds itself called to account for anomalies between its view of events and the public’s. The two responses to the conservative dilemma are censorship and propaganda.

“The cute cat theory of digital activism” — Tools specifically designed for dissident use are politically easy for the state to shut down, whereas tools in broad use become much harder to censor without risking politicizing the larger group of otherwise apolitical actors.

There are, broadly speaking, two arguments against the idea that social media will make a difference in national politics. The first is that the tools are themselves ineffective, and the second is that they produce as much harm to democratization as good, because repressive governments are becoming better at using these tools to suppress dissent.

Little Rice: Smartphones, Xiaomi, and the Chinese Dream

Posted on by

Amazon: “Smartphones have to be made someplace, and that place is China. In just five years, a company names Xiaomi (which means “little rice” in Mandarin) has grown into the most valuable startup ever, becoming the third largest manufacturer of smartphones, behind only Samsung and Apple. China is now both the world’s largest producer and consumer of a little device that brings the entire globe to its user’s fingertips. How has this changed the Chinese people? How did Xiaomi conquer the worlds’ biggest market” Can the rise of Xiaomi help realize the Chinese Dream, China’s bid to link personal success with national greatness? Clay Shirky, one of the most influential and original thinkers on the internet’s effects on society, spends a year in Shanghai chronicling China’s attempt to become a tech originator–and what it means for the future course of globalization.”

A few excerpts:

The mobile phone is a member of a small class of human inventions, a tool so essential it has become all but invisible, and life without it unimaginable.

There are only three universally personal items that someone will carry with them no matter where they live. The first two are money and keys; the third is the mobile phone, making it the first new invention added to that short list in three thousand years.

The number of mobile phone users crossed 4.5 billion last year, and because of dual accounts, there are now more mobile subscriptions in the world than there are people.

A smartphone is as different from a standard-issue Nokia 1100 as a computer is from a typewriter.

Mobile phones are a funny product, midway between commodity and luxury. They are a commodity in that everyone needs one. They are a luxury in that a phone makes a significant personal statement.

Status is a bigger feature of the iPhone (in China) than in the U.S. Electronics stores display phones running Android with the screen facing out, as usual, but iPhones are often displayed case out, to show off the Apple logo.

Nokia went from being the world’s most important mobile phone company to an also-ran in three years, collapsing into Microsoft’s waiting arms after another three, a generation of dominance undone in half a decade

If you make something that appeals to 5 percent of the Chinese population, you have a potential market the size of France.

“There is no news industry”

Posted on by

“If the public can speak directly to one another in large groups and with high visibility, then the self-definition of a journalist as a privileged translator takes a big hit. If you think of yourself as a member of the only class allowed to find and explain information, you find yourself in a very uncomfortable position.“

“The easiest way to get people in institutions to do interesting new things is for that institution to go bankrupt and for those people to change jobs.”

“Anything in the news business that can be commodified will be commodified. The people who cling to the idea that humans are required to rewrite wire service copy are spending money that no longer needs to be spent.”

From an interview with Clay Shirky by The Europlean Magazine

“Publishing is going away.”

Posted on by

“Publishing is not evolving. Publishing is going away. Because the word “publishing” means a cadre of professionals who are taking on the incredible difficulty and complexity and expense of making something public. That’s not a job anymore. That’s a button. There’s a button that says “publish,” and when you press it, it’s done.

In ye olden times of 1997, it was difficult and expensive to make things public, and it was easy and cheap to keep things private. Privacy was the default setting. We had a class of people called publishers because it took special professional skill to make words and images visible to the public. Now it doesn’t take professional skills. It doesn’t take any skills. It takes a WordPress install.”

— From interview with Clay Shirky

And this nugget: “Institutions will try to preserve the problem for which they are the solution”

We need more chaos in the news business

Posted on by
Reply

Clay Shirky argues we need for the news business to be more chaotic than it is because ” there are many more ways of getting and reporting the news that we haven’t tried than that we have.” Here are some excerpts from his latest essay:

Buy a newspaper. Cut it up. Throw away the ads. Sort the remaining stories into piles. Now, describe the editorial logic holding those piles together.
—
For all that selling such a bundle was a business, though, people have never actually paid for news. We have, at most, helped pay for the things that paid for the news.
—
But even in their worst days, newspapers supported the minority of journalists reporting actual news, for the minority of citizens who cared.
—
I could tell (my) students that when I was growing up, the only news I read was thrown into our front yard by a boy on a bicycle. They might find this interesting, but only in the way I found it interesting that my father had grown up without indoor plumbing.
—
News has to be subsidized because society’s truth-tellers can’t be supported by what their work would fetch on the open market. Real news—reporting done for citizens instead of consumers—is a public good.
—
A 30% reduction in newsroom staff, with more to come, means this is the crisis, right now. Any way of creating news that gets cost below income, however odd, is a good way, and any way that doesn’t, however hallowed, is bad.

Clay Shirky & Jay Rosen: “The Newest Thinking On New Media”

Posted on by
Reply

That’s the title of the post by Mitch Joel where I found a five-part video series (runs close to an hour) of a conversation between Clay Shirky (Here Comes Everybody and Cognitive Surplus) and Jay Rosen (Press Think). These are two very smart, informed thinkers and if you are even remotely involved with media or journalism, this conversation can help you make sense of what’s happening in your world. Here’s Part 1 to get you started:

In one of the segments Mr. Shirky uses the term “infovore” to describe someone with a voracious appetite for information. I now have a name for my condition. I spend a minimum of 4-5 hours every day grazing the information savannah and I never get full.

What will 2011 bring for journalism?

Posted on by
Reply

“…syndication makes little sense in a world with URLs. When news outlets were segmented by geography, having live human beings sitting around in ten thousand separate markets deciding which stories to pull off the wire was a service. Now it’s just a cost.”

“Giving credit where credit is due will reward original work, whether scoops, hot news, or unique analysis or perspective. This will be great for readers. It may not, however, be so great for newspapers, or at least not for their revenues, because most of what shows up in a newspaper isn’t original or unique. It’s the first four grafs of something ripped off the wire and lightly re-written, a process repeated countless times a day with no new value being added to the story.”

Full article by Clay Shirky