NP Rank:
Andrew Keen's Dumb Punditry
The Vancouver Sun published a set of predictions this year and they included the words of Andrew Keen, notorious skeptic of the amateur. When he's not drumming up controversy to peddle his book about the subject he can be found spouting off more abbreviated nonsense like this:
The Internet's days of being dominated by the anonymous, the amateur and the agitating are numbered, according to Andrew Keen, author of The Cult of the Amateur."I'm hopeful we're coming to our senses," he says.
The Internet was projected to be a $15-billion economy, he says, but that turned into a "false promise" as it essentially became a network of amateur bloggers posting whatever they wanted.
No one is willing to pay for online content, he says, so the only way to make money is through advertising. Businesses, however, don't want to associate themselves with the kind of nasty, objectionable or unreliable content that is often the result of a wide-open field of unknown users, he says.
I have attempted to argue with Mr. Keen in the past but, like a superbug of flawed reasoning, he is impervious to logic. His recent gibberish ignores the fact that it is not amateur content that got clobbered in 2008 as much as it was professional content. Consider the following datapoints compiled by Alan Mutter:
In the worst year in history for publishers, newspaper shares dropped an average of 83.3% in 2008, wiping out $64.5 billion in market value in just 12 months.
Although things were tough for all sorts of businesses in the face of the worst economic slump since the 1930s, the decline among the newspaper shares last year was more than twice as deep as the 38.5% drop suffered by the Standard and Poor’s average of 500 stocks.
The debacle was widespread and thoroughgoing, as detailed below. Here are some highlights from the data:
:: The shares of eight of the 14 publishers tracked in the survey fell by 90% or more. The best-performing companies were the Washington Post Co., New York Times Co., and News Corp., but WaPo, the least battered issue of all, still fell 51.5%.
If you want more evidence of the industry's crash please read more of Mutter's piece. It is sobering. I hope 2009 will be the year that Keen's worldview is acknowledged. With 'professionals' like him the world needs amateurs more than ever.



Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (2)
at 16:07 on January 5th, 2009
I haven't read Keen's book, but from what's written here, I can see his point. The seemingly infinite blog dump on the web has resulted in the biggest slush pile in history, and we're still sorting it out. In the case of journalism, there's something to be said for people with training and a natural writing ability to be the ones charged with recording the world's news. Judging by the incredibly fast turnover rate on these types of sites, citizen news appears to be about quantity, whereas good writing is about quality. That won't change, and thus, it's only a matter of time before the journalism/writing world settles and true writers rise to the surface again. In fact, it's already happening, judging by the number of "borrowed" wire articles on this site. On the other hand, I'm hard pressed to find a user submission here longer than three sentences.
at 16:21 on January 5th, 2009
There is very little in your comments that I disagree with but you are not representing Keen's view. Keen is arguing that amateur practice is dying because there is no money in it. His thesis is the definition of a contradiction. He is saying that unpaid work is dead because nobody is paying for it. The absurdity of that sentiment is remarkable.
The issue of quality it something else entirely. The challenge of platforms and companies that aggregate and collect amateur reports is to solve exactly the problem you identify -- that is to surface the good and ignore the bad. We try to do that everyday. Arguably companies like google do a variation of that too. To argue that there is no money in that enterprise demonstrates what can only be described as dimentia.