If Shirky is right, and we’re headed to a period where social media tools like YouTube, Flickr, and social networks like Facebook become “invisible,” what’s the impact on things you spend money on as consumers? Books? Movies? Music?
In chapter 4 of Here Comes Everybody, Shirky states that technologies do not profoundly change society until they are spread so widely through society that they become "invisible". These technologies are no longer seen as exciting, but we depend on them and inherently understand them. Social media tools and networks appear to be quickly becoming this integrated into society.
"Talkies" have become Imax 3-d motion pictures and are distributed through blue ray discs or downloaded straight to your TV, records have become mP3 downloads, and books have been uploaded to the web and are readable through Ipads and Kindles. The methods and products changed, but what we buy and why we buy (for entertainment, necessity, information, etc.) hasn't. I think the main problem that will continue to arise as social media tools and networks become more prevalent in the lack of buying that will take place. Napster is an example of this. When it first came out, it was so unique it gained enough visibility that the government stepped in and ruled it illegal and sued the company which eventually shut down. Now that these technologies are so widespread, there are tons of sites that enable you to format or record music videos from Youtube, songs from Grooveshark, full length TV episodes, and movies so they can be downloaded to any device (if you ignore safety and security risks). There is no way all of these sites can be shut down. I was aiding in a fourth grade class this summer, and they were asked to raise their hands if they had ever gotten free music on the internet. All but 3-4 kids raised their hands. When asked right after who thought this was illegal, only about 5 raised their hands. Many people don't know that downloading free music is illegal (in almost all cases). With greater prevalence of these sites there is less ability to control them and with less knowledge about copyright laws, we could be headed for a problem. Say no one downloads songs, movies, shows, or books, well we can still listen to, watch, or read them whenever we want if we have a computer or a phone with internet connection. Again like with illegal downloads, as sites become more numerous they aren't monitored as closely and more and more gets on them. This hurts the movie, film, and publishing industries.
I think another impact may be that consumers have more of a say in what they get. Let's look at music for example. Before social networks and media sharing, record companies found "talent", recorded them, and showcased them and then consumers basically determine if they are a "hit". Now some unknown singer can post a webcam video of her singing on Youtube, post it to her Facebook page, have all her friends and other viewers post it to there's as well. If people think she's talented she can get millions of views. Then a local newspaper, talk show, or even "America's Got Talent" may notice, and before she knows it, she's a star. The consumers "voted" first by viewing and then the music industry responded. It's not all that far fetched of an idea anymore, and if networks and sharing become so prevalent to be "invisible", I think it will happen more and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment