Preview

“Today’s Internet Is Killing Our Culture and Assaulting Our Economy” Andrew Keen (2007). Critique This Viewpoint.

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
3659 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
“Today’s Internet Is Killing Our Culture and Assaulting Our Economy” Andrew Keen (2007). Critique This Viewpoint.
The aim of this essay is to mainly critique the viewpoint made by Andrew Keen that “Today’s Internet is Killing Our Culture and Assaulting Our Economy.” First, the brief introduction of Andrew Keen’s book and his viewpoints will be introduced. Second, the Web 2.0 applications such as 1) Wikipedia, 2) Blog, and 3) YouTube will be brought up into the essay and discuss their pros and cons to the Internet environment. Third, Keen’s arguments about these three Web 2.0 applications will be demonstrated. Finally, the conclusion to Keen’s arguments will be concluded.

Keen’s book and his viewpoints
Andrew Keen, the author of the book “Today’s Internet is Killing Our Culture and Assaulting Our Economy.”, feels painful that digital elites overtop of the cultural gatekeepers and crowds’ knowledge took place of professionals. He addresses the points that professional journalists, reporters, editors, musicians and other experts in different areas. These cultural gatekeepers are gradually replaced by amateurs. Therefore, the truth and personal opinions, professional and amateurs’ views in this world can hardly be distinguished from.

Keen made many intensely interesting points in his book and the summaries are followings (Keen, 2007),

Google is a parasite which can not create its own idea. Its only accomplishment is to invent an excellent algorithm that can connect these contents to each other on the Internet.

Keen accepts the fact that Wikipedia can be edited by everyone in public and those authors are willing and sometimes addicted to share their knowledge around the web. However, the fact is that Wikipedia can sometimes be different from the truth and sometimes confuse public having the idea of Wikipedia is always a cyclopedia that can be relied on and referred to.

Splogs establish an entire low quality, meaningless, long and tedious web system environment. The purposes of doing this are to waste Internet users’ time and seal the benefits from advertisement

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Analytically describing digital technology, he says it has enabled a third and broader category of media. Apart form one-way public (broadcast) media like movies and two-way private (communication) media such as the telephone, civilization now has two-way media operating from private- to public- scale. The author insightfully describes digital as bridging broadcast media and communication media, enabling public to private information movement and vice-versa. Shirley then describes the new media as involving significant economic change. Because no one owns the Internet infrastructure, the Internet is just a set of agreements that bound data movement. With its contents easily accessible to all and the costs low, the Internet has enabled much social and creative behavior, says the…

    • 646 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Wikipedia is known as an unreliable site due to numerous amount of editorial adjustments on each article by unknown editors that may contain errors. The articles should not be used to make critical decisions, because you don’t know who wrote the information, and the source of the data could be false. Individuals can create malicious entries, and people with agendas have significant editing authority which make the site untrustworthy.…

    • 115 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In Mark Wilson’s article “Professors Should Embrace Wikipedia”, Wilson argues that despite the legitimacy of Wikipedia, educators should engage and take part in helping shape the direction of Wikipedia. In a test published in the journal “Nature”, articles in Wikipedia are said to be as revered as those in the “Encyclopedia Britannica.” Since the perceived lack of academic authority, Wilson suggests that those with research specialties should enroll as editors of Wikipedia to add, control, and learn from the information being provided. Wilson describes his own interaction with Wikipedia and how he, his students, and other colleagues have benefitted from the use of it. From becoming a Wikipedia editor and a collaborator with other colleagues, Wilson has “in turn taught some people how to properly reference ideas and information.” Wilson expresses his ideas to involve scholars with Wikipedia to make it more useful to students and the public. Wilson argues that Wikipedia is a source that although warned from, students will go to anyway to start projects, look up terms, and go for general information. If Wikipedia is “the largest coherent store of information and ideas” as stated by Wilson, then “teacher and scholars should have been on this train years ago for the benefit of our students and professions.”…

    • 885 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    It was interesting to learn their findings in which they found “eight serious errors” in which four came for Wikipedia and four came from Britannica. They also found 162 factual and misleading errors in Wikipedia while only finding 123 in Britannica. Articles chosen for the study varied in subject and were review by field experts; they were not told who wrote the articles. Wales founder of Wikipedia was asked what he thought of these findings and he was pleased with the findings and stated that the “error rate for each encyclopedia was not insignificant, and added that he thinks such numbers demonstrate that broad review of encyclopedia articles is needed” (Terdiman, 2005). The importance of this article was to show that even in a controlled setting there is room for error.…

    • 1193 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Throughout the years continuing positive advances of the Internet have impacted American culture and lifestyles drastically. From advances in the medical field, the way we communicate and how education has changed over the years. There are many advantages and disadvantages having the Internet so prominent in our lives. For most of us the Internet plays a very important role in our lives.…

    • 738 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The article “Mass over Mass Media”, written by Steven Pinker for the New York Times in 2010, shows that the new technology are “the only things that will keep us smart” instead of making us stupid (p 200). Even though many media critics argue that Power Point, Google, Twitter and other technologies are turning our brains to mush, Steven Pinker firstly puts forwards the arguments of the opponents and then proposed his own arguments and refutations by using logic, popular culture, and historical and academic examples. In the end, Steven Pinker came to a conclusion that the Internet and technologies are “helping us manage, search, and retrieve our collective intellectual output at different scales” (p 200). This article teaches me how to form a strong argument style by separately pointing out the opponent opinions firstly and then giving his own arguments to make the organization of an article very clearly. Additionally, in my paper, I will make a response to one of his statement, “the solution is not to bemoan technology is to develop strategies of self-control, as we do with every other temptation in life”(p 199).…

    • 727 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Evaluation of Wikipedia

    • 636 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Many people believe Wikipedia is not a good, or credible, source to be used for research. Much of this comes from the possibility it gives for people to alter the content of any material information offered by the website. Wikipedia “enables any visitor to a wiki site to edit, add to, and even delete the content of any page on the site.”(Miller) This is factual because Wikipedia gives the opportunity for any person to edit information on any topic. For protection it is recommended that we “remember to take a cautious view of what we think it tells us.”(Miller)…

    • 636 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Wikipedia is composed by voluntary and at times anonymous contributors. Unless an article is protected it can be edited by anyone. This can prove to be both beneficial and detrimental to users. This makes it more comprehensive and up to date. But it can also make it false or inaccurate if someone submits or edits in false information. An editor could do this knowingly or unknowingly. They…

    • 409 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    “Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia, but it is not helpful in many ways. It is uncomfortable to use as source of information for both academic and professional writing because of the fact that anybody with access to the internet can edit its contents. Worse more, the Wikipedia does not only allow individuals to edit its pages, but also allows them even to remain anonymous. It is impossible to validate the information from a source that is not known. Such a submission model is what mainly renders the information from the Wikipedia inaccurate, and difficult to verify as well as frowned upon in academic writing,” (Kan, Team A Debate).…

    • 1083 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Setting aside various issues, Wikipedia has proven to be unreliable compared to its’ edited counterparts such as journals or encyclopedias. These mediums are weighed as acceptable sources because of how extensively they are analyzed by professionals through a peer-review process. Wikipedia is completely unprotected, therefore anyone who wishes to edit an article, and this takes away any validity the articles might have. Articles have also been found to include legitimate inaccuracies, and the speed at which they have corrected said inaccuracies ranges widely from immediately addressed to entirely looked over. Biased politically-charged incentives also prove to illustrate a very one-dimensional approach when researching themes. Dilemmas can…

    • 146 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Is Wikipedia Inaccurate?

    • 953 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Providing a different approach and data collection and processing, Wikipedia has become a popular method for many to seek out answers. When it comes to the topic of Wikipedia, most of us will readily agree that it’s a great source for information. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of its validity. Whereas some are convinced that it’s a means of presenting facts, others maintain that its accuracy should be highly scrutinized. Although Wikipedia can provide expeditious access to vast amounts of knowledge, it should not be used a thoroughfare between proper research and producing quality written works.…

    • 953 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Credibility strengthens a research work (Spatt, 2011, p. 347) and greatly depends on the author’s qualification (Spatt, 2011, p. 348), regrettably, Wikipedia is written largely by amateurs because they have more free time on their hands and are make rapid changes in response to current [ (Wikipedia:About, 2012) ] events rather than people with relevant educational background and professional experience. The fact that anonymous contributions are allowed on Wikipedia is another source of concern around its credibility and when those with expert credentials make contributions they are given no additional weight which could have assisted the users to judge the credibility or otherwise of the contributions. In addition to this is the absence of an editorial board that could have helped to review and edit the contents before they become available for public use as is the case with other printed encyclopedia.…

    • 671 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Credibility of Wikipedia

    • 1033 Words
    • 5 Pages

    One of the most popular websites is Wikipedia. Wikipedia, a free online encyclopedia, was established in 2001. “It is now one of the largest sites on the web” (2007, Carleton College). The difference between Wikipedia and an encyclopedia is Wikipedia is a collaborative effort with articles written by individuals around the world using wiki software that allows content to be added or changed by anyone. All material can be edited. The issue with this method is the authors of the articles may not be experts on the topics they are writing, leaving a lot of room for error and bias. According to the founder, Jimmy Wales, “Wikipedia may not be a suitable source for academic uses”. He also states, “It is good enough knowledge, depending on what your purpose is” (2007, Carleton College.) This displays evidence that Wikipedia may not be credible because there is a lack of…

    • 1033 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Is Wikipedia Reliable?

    • 545 Words
    • 2 Pages

    One of the most popular sites to look up information on any topic, Wikipedia has been known for its open editorial information. Many people today distrust Wikipedia for its inaccuracy and false information. On the other hand Wikipedia is a great starting point for looking up information and veritable knowledge. Wikipedia has changed throughout the years, hiring historians to put the correct information. Not only has the site hired people to fix the problems, but also chained other site into its own proof. Everyday information is always changed through new theories and new discoveries. It is true that Wikipedia is not always a hundred percent correct but our knowledge isn’t always correct either and through this we can edit through Wikipedia. In Addition to our knowledge of what is truly right, Wikipedia is reliable because it has a great starting point in looking up information and has other sites that support it.…

    • 545 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    At the introduction of the internet, the age old question that accompanied with every advancement came to the forefront. Many have pondered whether the internet’s benefits out weight the risk it presents both consciously and unconsciously from the beginning. Some have asked is the Internet our master, or a simple tool that we control? To the optimist, this very question is a rhetorical one they rarely tend to consider. In their eyes, how can such a sweet, innocent tool of exploring specific evidence, paying one’s bill, and social networking become our master when we, as humans, are responsible for its very existence? To the skeptics, this question has to, must be answered. To them, it’s essential that we, as a collective unit, decide if the internet is controlling us so we can abandon it and have our mental capacities cleared up from propaganda that the Internet feeds us. In Nicholas Carr’s The Shallows, this whole debate is brought unto the forefront. According to Carr, the internet limits our knowledge growth, rather than expand it. Although I, as one of its avid users, see many benefits of the internet to our daily lives, I understand Carr’s argument that the internet presents us more challenges than it solves by placing a great demands on our attention, while providing with large amount of tiny pieces of data that feel like a great deal of knowledge.…

    • 1310 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays