How has the growth of the internet affected the concept of truth within our society?

The explosion of the Internet throughout the world has ultimately changed the way in which society can communicate. It has taken mass communication to an entirely new level and inundated the common person with information. It is seen by many as an ideal; one that is helping to close the gap between societal classes, by empowering an ever widening audience with a bounty of easily accessible knowledge. Yet in reality, whilst the internet has become a sea of readily available information, its use as an equalising platform to share our points of view, ideas and information is ultimately corrupting the reliability of fact, and in turn society’s concept of the truth. The amount of information available is now so large, that it is becoming difficult to determine fact from fiction, and what is true from what is false. Its influence has evoked a growing trend towards post-modern and relativist thinking, ultimately blurring the concept of truth even further within our society.

According to cyber-culture authors Andrew Keen and Pierre Levy, the abundance of information now available over the internet is akin to Jorge Luis Borges’ infinite “Library of Babel”, in which the majority of works are pure gibberish. The analogy drawn by Keen explains that “it is a place where there is no concrete reality, no right and wrong, no governing moral code. It is a place where truth is selective and constantly subject to change” (Keen, 2007, p.84). The vast information found on the internet is user driven content. It is the product of technological change; of the transition between a “first [and] second media age”, a concept introduced by Professor Mark Poster in 1995. The first media age was characterized as the one-to-many concept of communication. In which a limited number of people could produce a message to communicate with many people who would receive the message. “There were educational, financial and technical restrictions to those who could produce, and to those who could transmit” (Stockwell, 2008). The Internet became representative of the second media age, in that it allowed for a many-to-many concept of communication. It allowed the audience to become the authors, and according to Keen “amateur hour” has now arrived (2007,p.34). The internet acted as an equalising technology, allowing the common person a voice. The Web 2.0 revolution realised a fully networked and connected society, with the promise of greater depth of information, truth, unbiased opinion and global perspective. Keen skeptically refers to this as “the great seduction”, stating that it instead led to “digital Darwinism, the survival of the loudest and most opinionated”(2007, p.15).

Before the second media age, truth was often associated with ‘objectivity’- the idea of offering balance and remaining impartial with the delivery of information. The equalizing nature of the internet, allowed every person the opportunity to share their own ‘subjective’ point of view on a wide range of subjects eg. via a website or a blog. Each point of view or opinion could be considered a new version of the facts; translating to a new version of the truth. This change in ideology from an ‘objective’ concept to a ‘subjective’ one, paralleled the growing popularity of postmodernism and relativism. Within this school of thought, a fact is viewed as merely one person’s version of the truth, to which millions more versions may be presented; any of which being no more acceptably correct than the other. Le vy contributes to this notion stating that “each additional connection [ to the internet ] adds heterogeneity [ diversity making it difficult to ensure a consistent meaning ], new information sources, new perspectives, so that global meaning becomes increasingly difficult to read or circumscribe, or enclose, or control” (1997, p.101). The concept of ‘totalised’ truth was blurred within the media age transition, and it has become increasingly difficult to find the authoritative voice that was once dominant.

Keen discusses the idea that in a world of amateurs there are no experts, and considers that if every person was an amateur at a broad range of interests and shared their time thinly over these areas, no one would excel at anything (2007,pp.38-39). He eludes both to the importance of specialisation for efficient production and to the importance of the years of training and specialisation an expert brings to the collation of accurate information. Wikipedia, a collaborative free web encyclopaedia has been targeted as an unreliable source of truthful information as “Visitors do not need specialized qualifications to contribute [and] most of the articles can be edited by anyone with access to the Internet” (Wikipedia, 2008). According to BBC writer David Reid, Wikipedia is “criticised for its lack of authority and vulnerability to vandalism, bias and inaccuracy [and it is] seen as pushing a myth that there is a democracy of talent and that the wisdom of the crowd is equal to that of a hard-working expert” (Reid, 2008). The anonymity of the author is also a concern, with the ‘username’ acting as an effective pseudonym to hide true identity and consequently evade accountability for false or misleading information. The owners and reporters of traditional media [eg. newspapers and news networks] are held legally accountable for what is published and presented as truth. Whereas on the internet, owners of websites and blogs are not liable for what is posted by a third party. Without accountability, Keen argues that users have “little encouragement or incentive to question or evaluate the information they post” (2007, p.74). Furthermore, an amateur, unlike an expert or professional, is not paid for their time or effort in researching and ensuring the veracity of their information.

The question of time is also raised by author James Moore who explains that the cost of time in our modern society is increasing. He argues that this coupled with the increasing volume of data to be worked is combining to escalate the scarcity and value of truthful information, which he stresses “is the keystone of knowledge” (Moore, 2002, p.76). During 2000-03, Dr. Hal Varian of Information Sciences at the University of California conducted a research project titled “How Much Information”. From which it was concluded that on average the amount of data produced each year is doubling. In our search through this ever increasing amount of data, author John Battelle states that “we [the users] are incredibly lazy. We type in a few words at most, then expect the engine to bring back the perfect results…we want results now” (2005, p.24). A time conscious internet user is therefore unlikely to spend their spare time cross-checking and verifying the reliability of their information or its source, nor may they be aware that they should have to. Keen recognises that “with no one to step in and question the veracity of information in the digital world, mistakes, lies and rumours multiply like germs”, [readers then] repeat this mis-information, compounding the problem, creating a collective memory [and concept of truth] that is deeply flawed” (2007,p.75).

It is ironic that an excess of information would ultimately compromise knowledge and our understanding of the truth. Moore’s “economy of knowledge” analogy can be used to conclude. It explains that the vast supply of information on the internet is comparable to an excess supply of any good and service, which leads to a decrease in its price and value (Moore, 2002, p.79). Hence, our excess supply of information is consequently devaluing and compromising the totality of society’s knowledge and concept of truth.


Sources:
Keen, Andrew (2007) “The Cult of the Amateur: How Today’s Internet is Killing Our Culture and Assaulting Our Economy”, Nicholas Brealey Publishing, Great Britain

Battelle, John (2005) “The Search: How Google and Its Rivals Rewrote the Rules of Business and Transformed Our Culture”, Penguin Group, New York

Stockwell, Steve (2008) “Lecture Notes”, Faculty of Arts, Griffith University, Retrieved on 10/05/08 from https://learning.griffith.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab=courses&url=/bin/common/course.pl?course_id=_55255_1&frame=top

Reporter’s Without Borders (2005) “Handbook for Bloggers and Cyber-Dissidents”, Retrieved from http://www.rsf.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=542

Poster, Mark (1995) “Postmodern Virtualities”, Retrieved on 10/05/08 from http://www.hnet.uci.edu/mposter/writings/internet.html

Fisher, Dana R. & Wright, Larry Michael (2001) “On Utopias and Dystopias: Toward an Understanding of the Discourse Surrounding the Internet”, Retrieved on 10/05/08 from http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2001.tb00115.x

Levy, Pierre (1997) “Cyberculture”, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis

Hart, Kevin (2004) “postmodernism: a beginner’s guide”, Oneworld Publications, Oxford

Long, Tony (2007) “Internet Smackdown: The Amateur vs. The Professional”, Retrieved on 13/05/08 from http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/commentary/theluddite/2007/06/luddite_0621

Lessig, Lawrence (2007) “Keen’s “The Cult of the Amateur”; BRILLIANT!”, Retrieved on 13/05/08 from http://www.lessig.org/blog/2007/05/keens_the_cult_of_the_amateur.html

Flintoff, John-Paul (2007) “Thinking is so over”, Retrieved on 13/05/08 from http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/personal_tech/article1874668.ece

Kresta, Dave (2007) “Slouching Towards Mediocrity”, Retrieved on 13/05/08 from http://www.collaborativeye.com/collaboration_journal/slouching-towards-mediocrity-brainwashed-by-the-cult-of-the-.html

Reid, David (2008) “Searching for the Truth online”, Retrieved on 13/05/08 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/click_online/7208520.stm

Schonfeld, Erick (2008) “The truth according to Wikipedia”, Retrieved on 13/05/08 from http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/04/08/the-truth-according-to-wikipedia/

Meagher, Evan (2008) “What is truth on the Internet?”, Retrieved on 13/05/08 from http://evanmeagher.net/2008/04/what-is-truth-on-the-internet

Hinton, Samuel (2005) “Towards A Critical Theory Of The Internet”, Retrieved on 13/05/08 from http://creative.canberra.edu.au/sam/hintonphd.pdf

Moore, James (2002) “The Internet Weather: Balancing Continuous Change and Constant Truths”, John Wiley & Sons Inc, New York

Varian, Dr. Hal (2000/2003) “How Much Information”, Retrieved on 13/05/08 from http://www2.sims.berkeley.edu/research/projects/how-much-info-2003/execsum.htm

Essay Outline

How has the growth of the internet affected the concept of truth within our society?

The explosion of the Internet throughout the world has ultimately changed the way in which society can communicate. It has taken mass communication to an entirely new level and inundated the common person with information. In theory it is a utopian ideal, one that is helping to close the gap between societal classes, by empowering an ever widening audience with a bounty of easily accessible knowledge.

Yet in reality this technology may be closer to dystopia. Whilst the internet has become a sea of readily available knowledge, its use as a platform to share ideas and information is ultimately corrupting the reliability of fact. In theory, the internet allows any man and his dog to post information, eg. in the form of a website or a blog. It has caused a technological change and unlike the first media age, here in the second there are very few restrictions to production and transmission.

The amount of information available is now so large, that it is difficult to determine fact from fiction, and what is true from what is false? Post-modern and relativist thinking has also become popular within Generation Y, blurring the concept of truth even further. Within these schools of thought a fact is viewed as merely one person’s version of the truth, to which millions more versions may be presented; any of which being no more acceptably correct than the other.


Points to expand:
- Truth (creation- subjectivity-context of writer as an influence)
- Knowledge (creation)
- Statistical (growth of the internet)
- Blogging (free reign / share ideas, truths-versions)
- Wikipedia (blind leading the blind)
- Old Media-extinction (books / newpapers redundant)
- Google- search (popular links / advertisement affecting searches)
- Reliability- (taught in schools? Question information enough? Users must regulate/rate their own information-cross-reference. Recognise types of sites- eg. edu, com)
- Educational tool? (Better educated, knowledgeable nation or worse?)

Sources:
· Keen, Andrew (2007) “The Cult of the Amateur: How Today’s Internet is Killing Our Culture and Assaulting Our Economy”, Nicholas Brealey Publishing, Great Britain

· Battelle, John (2005) “The Search: How Google and Its Rivals Rewrote the Rules of Business and Transformed Our Culture”, Penguin Group, New York

· Stockwell, Steve (2008) “Lecture Notes”, Faculty of Arts, Griffith University, Retrieved on 10/05/08 from https://learning.griffith.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab=courses&url=/bin/common/course.pl?course_id=_55255_1&frame=top

· Reporter’s Without Borders (2005) “Handbook for Bloggers and Cyber-Dissidents”, Retrieved from http://www.rsf.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=542

· Poster, Mark (1995) “Postmodern Virtualities”, Retrieved on 10/05/08 from http://www.hnet.uci.edu/mposter/writings/internet.html

· Fisher, Dana R. & Wright, Larry Michael (2001) “On Utopias and Dystopias: Toward an Understanding of the Discourse Surrounding the Internet”, Retrieved on 10/05/08 from http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2001.tb00115.x