Comments on: Davos07: Big guys on blogs

By: Yankee Wombat | An American in Oz

Yankee Wombat | An American in Oz — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 04:07:10 +0000

[...] Jeff Jarvis of Buzz Machine has recently been to the Davos conference and as one of the Net’s leading media commentators he has a fundamental insight into where the world’s movers and shakers - he refers to them as ‘machers‘ which is Yiddish for big shot - are in understanding the Internet. Perhaps the most important â€˜dingâ€™ moment I had at Davos was that the powerful are, no surprise, one step behind in their understanding of the true significance of the Internet: They think it is all about individual action when, in truth, itâ€™s about collective action. And so they donâ€™t yet see that the Internet will shift power even more than they realize. The powerful at Davos are just starting to talk about the Internet and individual empowerment; we heard that often up in the Alps from media (this has become editorsâ€™ cant), leaders in politics (like the U.K.â€™s Gordon Brown and the EUâ€™s Viviane Reding), business (Bill Gates), and even technology (Gates, again). They are not alone; we have heard this for quite a while back down on earth. And itâ€™s certainly true that the Internet enables each of us to find the information that matters to us, to publish what we think, and do what we want. But that is only a step along the way to the fate of society after the Internet. The Internet is more about collective action. It is about connections. It gives us the power to find each other, to join together, to coalesce around issues, ideas, products, desires, and activities as never before, leaping over all borders, real and cultural. That is the historic progression of power that we are witnessing. That is what we heard from the people who truly understand this mechanism because they are building it: Caterina Fake and Stuart Butterfield of Flickr, Chad Hurley of YouTube, Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook. At Davos, these pioneers didnâ€™t contradicted the machers when they said that the Internet is about individualism; on that plane, they were talking past each other. But as I sat down to make my notes about what I learned at Davos, this is what hit me between the eyes. [...]

By: BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » Davos07: My big conclusion

BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » Davos07: My big conclusion — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 13:05:59 +0000

[...] The powerful at Davos are just starting to talk about the internet and individual empowerment; we heard that often up in the Alps from media (this has become editors’ cant), leaders in politics (like the U.K.’s Gordon Brown and the EU’s Viviane Reding), business (Bill Gates), and even technology (Gates, again). They are not alone; we have heard this for quite a while back down on earth. And it’s certainly true that the internet enables each of us to find the information that matters to us, to publish what we think, and do what we want. But that is only a step along the way to the fate of society after the internet. [...]

By: Chris

Chris — Sat, 27 Jan 2007 14:11:27 +0000

Murdoch is correct. The Chinese government believes its role is to protect society from destabilizing influences, including anything that would limit the state’s ability to protect society.

China will get democracy eventually, but it won’t happen tomorrow. In the meantime, it’s up to Murdoch, Jack Ma, Google and the rest of us keep pushing the door open a little wider every day.

By: Grayson

Grayson — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 13:46:28 +0000

Tell Brown “Right On Dude” for me. We southern (US) bloggers are having a field day smokin’ out all kinda backroom shinnanigans now that the Georgia Legislature is in session again, and we (politically-minded bloggers) are starting to gel in some just downright delightful ways; outside of Louisiana, these here Georgia boys about wrote the book on smoke-filled room lawmaking.

We have so much material to work with in GA that we can just hit any key and start a firestorm. And believe you me, MSM is watching our every move — just like the little chickensh*ts charlatans they’ve become. The most fun, especially for a former MSM gal like me at least, is calling THEM out for their decades of compliance and pandering. (Don’t tell ‘em what tail is wagging what dog now. They STILL think they’re the whole bark in town, bless their hearts… so slow that even Murdoch’s rumblings have yet to hit town.) Politicians are not so much “catching up” (yet) in the Deep South as trying to duck and cover.

And you wanna see the most scramblin’ outside of a Waffle House, look no further than the AJC, Cox Enterprises (that would be virtually all of our radio and TV in Atlanta), Georgia Public Broadcasting, or the entire southern-based PR industry. They’re so slow ’round here that most are still trying to figure out what hit ‘em, and what ancient downtown business club to call a luncheon (It’s always a “luncheon” round here, never just “lunch”) meeting within so that they can “initiate a discussion” (typically sponsored by Delta or Coke in the old days) to see what can be “done” about this “trend.” Heeeeelarious!

I swear I haven’t had this much fun in years.

By: Will Pollard

Will Pollard — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 10:57:55 +0000

Will the Davos bloggers also consider the way journalists in the US and UK restrain comment in a way they see as responsible but also suits government policy? I am thinking of the Al Jazeera memo for example. The Daily Mirror reported a possible discussion about bombing a television station. This is now subject of a court case under the Official Secrets Act to be held partly in secret. I find there is not as much reporting of this as I would expect.

I am not supporting censorship in China. But the discussion on press freedom etc. should also include some facts about the US and UK.