An Interview with Andrew Keen, Author of The Cult of the Amateur

Andrew Keen, an Advocate of Professional Journalism, Says Participatory Media is Hurting Culture

Andrew Keen sounds a bit ticked off. It's been twice already that citizen journalists have scheduled interviews to talk about his new book, "The Cult of the Amateur." And twice they've canceled on him. This doesn't bode well for citizen journalism, says the author and Internet executive
An Interview with Andrew Keen, Author of The Cult of the Amateur
 who rails against social media.

"It probably reflects the inadequacy of amateur media," he says over the phone on Wednesday - in the third attempt at the interview. "No excuses."

Keen worries about amateur media - and its many monikers: blogging, citizen journalism, social media, Web 2.0 and user-generated content. The flood of blogging increases the likelihood that misinformation and poor quality will prevail on the Web, Keen says. The lack of editing and the dearth of expertise compound the problem.

His book, "The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet Is Killing Our Culture," debuted in June and ranks 5,930 in sales on Amazon.com's book list. In it, Keen writes that egalitarian media creation is "threatening the very future of our cultural institutions." Amateurs can't write whatever they want - especially on topics like Iraq - because their facts, expertise and judgment are suspect, he says.

"You can't sit in your underpants in Indiana and blog about Iraq," Keen says over the phone, noting that such efforts shouldn't be taken seriously. "It's not edited. That's the other problem."

Keen wasn't always a skeptic. A self-described Internet entrepreneur who founded the short-lived Web venture AudioCafe.com in 1996, he dubs himself a Web 1.0 pioneer. He participated in what he calls a "Russian Revolution" of Internet media.

He writes in his book that he drank the participatory media Kool-Aid and started believing that a backlash against traditional news outlets and a democratization of media was essential.

But it was in 2004, at a media counterculture summit in California, that Keen realized participatory media was, as he says, "useless." He worries that a rush of blogging is having deleterious effects on information consumption. But it's not the tools, he maintains; it's how people use them.

 
Comments 1 - 10 of 94 Next >>
Comments
Type in Your Comments Below

Andrew Keen is wrong. If the internet teaches folk to be suspicious of what they read that's a good thing and something they should carry over when they read or watch mainstream media. No matter the source and no matter how honest the individual might be bias and opinion enter into everything. No one should believe all they see, hear or read.... unless I wrote it... ;o)

Posted on 12/08/2008 at 4:12:47 AM

There is plenty of opportunity for people to be mis-informed in traditional and social media. The ideal is having ideas afloat which encourage people to dig deeper until they feel satisfied with what the "truth" may be.

Posted on 07/31/2008 at 8:07:58 AM

It sounds like one clear point is ringing out: neither credentials nor "outsider" status gives automatic credibility, and even long-"trusted" journalists like Dan Rather may have an agenda. Critical thinking is, was, and will be key for all involved, producer or consumer.

Posted on 09/28/2007 at 11:09:00 AM

How can someone be against amateur media and use words like "blogosphere"?

Posted on 09/18/2007 at 11:09:00 AM

By the way, very well written article. Nice job!

Posted on 09/18/2007 at 10:09:00 AM

This guy sounds a bit sour grapes to me. I have a Bachelor's degree in Journalism from a top University. I have been a professional writer for years. I still blog, and I have friends that barely finished high school that blog and do so better than I do. Everyone has a right to social commentary. And everybody has to start somewhere. I'd gladly hold out for the media outlets that pay if I ever find any. I've been in some glossies even and it's always the same story "We can't possibly pay you for your work, but we hope you will still contribute." Why shouldn't I post my work on my own blog? At least I can say what I want and not have to wait a year and a half to have it printed?

Posted on 09/18/2007 at 10:09:00 AM

There is no "surge of media censorship." Print media is much more free than it was in the past few decades with looser restrictions on the topics covered and the language that can be used. And as for "Where else to turn to for an opportunity of still getting published?" The answer is anywhere. There are thousands and thousands of places that publish any type of content you can imagine. The problem is that they have standards. If you can't find a place that will publish you at all, you need to rethink what you're writing. Instead of giving up and publishing it yourself, try making it better or making it something that people will want to read.

Posted on 09/18/2007 at 9:09:00 AM

Not everyone who does "citizen media" is an amateur. A lot of professionals have been involved, with the surge of media censorship and the lack of free speech. A professional must write and create, come hell or high water, at least to keep up with the demands of credentials. Where else to turn to for an opportunity of still getting published?

Posted on 09/18/2007 at 3:09:00 AM

Interesting; I hadn't heard of this argument, and I can at least understand how the propagation and respect for any ol' person's work who is just spouting off what they heard their buddy say at the bar can undermine the nation's intelligence, media and have negative consequences. Unlike commenter "Parri" I don't think everyone is intelligent enough to take blogs, myspace and youtube with the grain of salt - there are lots of people for whom this is their only "literature" - they don't read books, and would never research anything on their own. Though I do agree with Michael Chambers' comment that a good society lets its people be heard, so it is a thought provoking debate.

Posted on 09/18/2007 at 12:09:00 AM

I understand what this guy is trying to say, but the thing is that he should remember that people know what they are reading, why and where they are reading it. For example college students are told that there are certain points websites have to match before you can use their info. Alot of people also know that most of the time bloggers, myspace and youtube give opinions not facts - and I think we all know how to differentiate between the two. We all also know that professionals tend to be biased also. At least with "amateur writing you get to hear someone else's point of view, which broadens a person's prospective. Any ways nice topic.

Posted on 09/17/2007 at 3:09:00 PM

Comments 1 - 10 of 94 Next >>