Myths and Misconceptions of Technology

Andrew Keen, author of The Cult of the Amateur, has been repeatedly criticized for his fervent stance against the consequences of Web 2.0 as he perceives them. Much of the criticism turns against his apparently unbalanced arguments and inconsistent examples, which mistakes most of the apparent objectives of the book. As Keen explains himself the book is “unashamedly biased” and you have to take it from there. His admittedly subjective view is that of a flat Anglican parish in a loophole of time. There is no real cultural, social, economic or historic relevance there. He takes a snapshot of his personal status quo and defies any change. All this gets him enough media (mainstream and other) attention that he can easily shrug off any criticism.

Royalty not quality

Assuming these premises of good old marketing mechanisms one can find some valuable points in Keen’s musings. However, anybody who is not flat out to embrace Web 2.0 no matter what and is concerned about the downsides may regret that there is no solid argumentative basis in the book. More regrettably still, this attitude undermines one of the major issues concerning quality of published content. But then again, would Keen go more for the subtlety and balance he might not be as ubiquitous in the media as he currently is and we all know the squitty arse never lacks for shit…