XWSF Tassell ([info]tassellrealm) wrote,
@ 2006-04-15 23:21:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Internet Thought.
Unless you can create a relatively clean feedback loop between your internet activity and your daily life - your efforts will have been wasted, and your work will sit in a vacuum.

If you're unable to make that link: better to mow the lawn, or help an old lady across the road.

The division between internet media and established media is a trick, a scam.

It's a way of siphoning dissident voices away from mainstream media.

It's like giving all the troublemakers a big playroom where they can make all the noise they want, and not be heard.

(10 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]stanleylieber
2006-04-16 03:27 am UTC (link)
On the other hand, I trade material goods with Internet intentities, which at least partially supports my lifestyle. In the end the prism you view this through relies on whether or not you think the Internet is swallowing the real world.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]tassellrealm
2006-04-16 10:22 am UTC (link)
Good morning, Stanley Leiber.

Referring to the first part of your post: Well that is a good feedback loop into your everyday life.

Is the internet swallowing the real world?

Well, I was reading yet another very well put together anti-Bush tract on the internet the other night, and a Wait A Minute! came up:

Over the last few years, I've read more negative stuff about this guy than I have about Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, Attila The Hun, Dracula and Genghis Khan put together, and not only is he still in power, his power isn't even slightly shaken by all this apparently liberating limitless dissent and communication that can occur between people these days.

Why is this?

Has the the internet established itself as a vessel in which to siphon off negative thoughts and feelings before they can have any impact on the real world?

Or perhaps it's like when you're a young man, if you get into pornography - you're probably not going to do anything about getting laid.

Or TV, if you sit on the sofa watching adventure films every night - you're probably not going to go out and have any adventures.

And why is it that England (that traditionally does something new within this sphere every two or three years) hasn't produced any new music scenes/movements since the internet started.

Why is it that TV, including 'serious' news media has become more and more moronic and celebrity obsessed? When I would have thought that that normal media would have been influenced and informed by the web with a net result of it being more intelligent, not less.

Why? Why? Why?








(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]stanleylieber
2006-04-16 03:21 pm UTC (link)
'Why? Why? Why?'

Because instant global communications have given lie to the myth of monoculture?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]stanleylieber
2006-04-16 03:34 pm UTC (link)
I should note here that I do at leat partially agree with your initial thesis. However I don't find the Internet an inconsequential medium, especially as it expands to encompass old media as well as exploiting its own unique properties.

What's starting to happen in terms of politics is the harnessing of the distributed organizational strengths of time-shifted networking in ways that were never previously possible (i.e., we don't all have to be face to face or present for the conference call to aggregate, correlate and exchange ideas). The 2004 Democratic Primary and its aftermath provide an interesting case study into this. In America, the other parties are not going to sit on their haunches. The 2008 Presidential campaign will likely be waged largely in the digital realm. There are no Walter Kronkites left in the world; fewer and fewer people can agree on who could fill such a chair.

I certainly see our faith in leaders splintering but I'm not sure if that is wholly beneficial to those who would promote them.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]tassellrealm
2006-04-16 08:40 pm UTC (link)
I should note here that I do at leat partially agree with your initial thesis. However I don't find the Internet an inconsequential medium, especially as it expands to encompass old media as well as exploiting its own unique properties.

Yeah, sure.

Whenever I pick up a book these days, I'm frequently frustrated by not being able to cross-reference, etc.

My frustration is less with the internet itself, and more with it's stubborn refusal to whip the crown off the head of the 'normal' unconsenting media.

Perhaps we're just getting to the harnel-aoot of things.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]tassellrealm
2006-04-16 08:23 pm UTC (link)
Yes, I know that.

But why, in terms of 'official reality', is the monoculture still dominant?

Perhaps a saturation point has to be reached.

On the other hand - perhaps there is no saturation point.

Time alone will tell.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]stanleylieber
2006-04-17 01:04 am UTC (link)
I just think that old world is becoming increasingly irrelevant. As the generations born into this technology reaches the age of majority the dichotomy will cease to exist (television killed political prose; the Internet will kill television). Newspapers have been on the outs for a decade, but the news networks are also now terrified at their evaporating grasp on the electorate. I do believe we're in a transitional phase.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]tassellrealm
2006-04-17 08:29 am UTC (link)
Yeah.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Anonymous)
2006-05-10 04:24 pm UTC (link)

I'd like you to expand the notion of the big playroom,think also for example about the subterranean networks of anarchists across america and europe - punks in squat houses in the know of where to get waste food, exchanging knowledge, getting into workers' unions, riding freight trains - and how the internet makes their bonds stronger and tighter, their shared knowledge easier to access, their invisible societies more 'real'. Also their less politically active, slightly less community minded artist counterparts. And terrorist networks like Al-Qaeda which feel to me as being essentially the same, only with more of a real threat. Please consider also how the internet attenuates the need for big cities, the political resonances of this new proud provincialism for the people born into it.

Mister Smile

(Reply to this)

Can't we balst some and stop them down?
(Anonymous)
2006-12-26 07:25 pm UTC (link)
Should we go look, Uchitel?
[b][url="http://hydrocodone.dewall.info "]hydrocodone side effects vicodin[/url][/b]

(Reply to this)

(10 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…