The Laughing Wolf

Do They Want Us To Lose? (Yes) Part IV

Technological changes brought about the Old Media and provided them with a great deal of power (See Part I, Part II and Part III). Towards the end of the 20th Century, the Old Media had made billions of dollars and controlled similar amounts; it held considerable political power and the ability to shape debates and elections; and, it had a proven ability to literally change the world. Yet, just as changing technology had helped bring them this power, a new “press” emerged that threatens to bring it all crashing down. Just as the secular and religious nobility were justly frightened by Gutenberg’s press, so too do the Old Media see themselves frightened and threatened by the new press of the Internet.

Before we go any further, it is extremely worthwhile to spend a few minutes exploring a concept called “gatekeeping.” Gatekeeping is most often discussed in terms of the media, but it really is an information/knowledge technology system description. The various gatekeeping models all show how information/knowledge flows from start to finish. There are quite a few steps in any of these models and processes, and it is the number of steps that determines how free (and how accurate) information is within any given construct. This applies to social constructs as well.

As an example, let’s look at a book in pre-Gutenberg times. The writer of the book has written (or had a scribe do so) their thoughts onto sheets or a roll of parchment or paper. The writer is the source and the book/scroll is the information. For that information to flow out to others, copies must be made and distributed. If the writer is wealthy, they could theoretically hire teams of scribes to do this and spread them around. This rarely was the case, and for many years it was monks or those employed by the Church who copied books and passed out the copies. What this means to our model is that we suddenly have the leadership of the Church deciding what books/scrolls would be copied, and how they would be edited. There were several levels involved, but for simplicity we will go with the top leadership, a Bishop, and the head of the local group of monks. Now, in addition there were secular authorities, and it would not be uncommon for their to be two layers of approval there. What this means is that we now have five levels of gatekeepers between the source knowledge and the distribution of the knowledge.

But, the gatekeeping did not stop there. Once the limited number of copies were distributed, it was most often up to a local priest what was read from the book, how it was edited and slanted, etc. Sometimes, the local authorities also demanded a say, so there were now seven layers of gatekeeping between the source and the destination. Each of these seven levels not only were a binary switch (yes/no), but also had the ability to edit or change that material to suit themselves. The net result is that information was not very free and what reached the destination may or may not bear any resemblance to what was created at the origin.

In theory, Gutenberg’s press eliminated many layers of gatekeeping. In practice, the authorities did all in their power to reinstate them and add more. Even then, it was well known that knowledge is power, but the new technology was not fully controllable. With the advent of more books, even carefully approved and edited texts, literacy rates grew and with it came new and independent thought.

In practice, the Old Media is not that far away from pre-Gutenberg gatekeeping. In a modern media organization, you have – on average – the following between “news” and the destination: a reporter, a beat editor, a general editor, a copy editor, a managing editor, and the publisher. Each of these is a binary switch (yes/no) and has the chance to edit/change as they see fit.

Mass media does indeed provide images, sound, and information in amounts never before seen. The amount is not in issue, what is rapidly becoming the focus is the quality of that information. Until recently, the public, the destination of the information has had little or no ability to directly view the source. A great deal of the power of the Old Media comes from the fact that it controlled access to the source material. The members of the mass media decided what would be news, how it would be presented, and the public had to take what they said on faith, just as our pre-Gutenberg ancestors had to take the information and news that came from the village priest on faith.

Just as the press provided each family with a Bible to read and interpret for themselves, the new “press” that is the internet theoretically provides each individual with access to the source of information flow. It reduces the number of gatekeepers effectively to one; and, unlike past technology, there can be multiple sources to view the source. In this way, if one gatekeeper blocks or distorts, then other access will clearly show this.

Indeed, that is exactly what is happening right now in Iraq. We have the “news” as presented by the Old Media. We also have direct feeds from cameras, blogs, and other sources on the spot, so that we are able to compare the information. This comparison between multiple sources is most interesting and illuminating. What is happening is fascinating.

Previously, the means to bypass the Old Media have been extremely limited. Someone could write a letter or tell a friend or relative what the real story was, in their opinion. Now, thanks to the Internet, their words reach thousands instantly, and hundreds of thousands within a matter of hours. The words, images, and sounds they provide give counterpoint to what is presented by the mass media. A growing percentage of the public has become aware of this, and is starting to take a critical look at the Old Media and its reporting.

This is not helped by stories such as this one at Right Thoughts (hat tips to Instapundit and Winds of Change). Stories such as this coverage of the marginalization of Nick Berg by the Old Media. Stories made possible and posted through the Internet.

The Old Media sees its power slipping, and with that comes loss of revenue, loss of power, and loss of political capital and clout. They see their beliefs losing in the marketplace of ideas, but rather than question the beliefs they prefer instead to question the intelligence and wisdom of the masses. Add to this an overwhelming (and overweening) hatred of President Bush, and you have the makings of a classic Greek tragedy.

Their friends are out of office (if you think it is the conservatives who are putting out legislation to regulate the Internet and Internet Journalism, look again) and growing increasingly out of touch; the Internet is already providing serious competition and damage to them, and that is only going to grow; the members of the Old Media are, like their friends, growing increasingly out of touch; and, they have no one to blame but themselves, and that they will never do.

To their eyes, the only thing to do is to put their friends back in office this November, by hook or by crook. All is fair in love and war, and the justifications for what they are calling coverage are just that. What is happening is a complete and utter desecration of the Canons of Journalism, but that is okay because it is for the greater good: the retention of power by a self-anointed elite, and at least one final infliction of social engineering by those who know what is best for us far better than we do. The end justifies the means.

This will become increasingly apparent, both because of blogging and Internet journalism, and because of reporters – like some of those featured above – breaking ranks and taking an ethical rather than political stand. For those that will see, it will be clear and painful. Spread the word, for the real show is just starting, and it is one that we cannot afford to miss.

-30-

Related Post: Playing "Telephone" With The Media