Cyber Means Pilot

For quite some time, I’ve been using, consuming and generally playing around in the sandbox of what some may call “Web 2.0.” The term seems to have some weight and power behind it. Tim O’ Reilly tried to define the space and what makes 2.0 different from its 1.0 form. The major difference touched on by this article is the ability of users to control their experience online. This second generation of web development is defined by the read/write capabilities of users on the site. The web is now editable and has the ability to express any point of view in real time. However, we’ve been using this technology for almost five years. Therefore, it is fair to assume that there may be a change in how we conduct ourselves online. The question is how? 
 
I think it is important to compare how the web has developed to the development of a society. In order for a society to develop, there must a common language and common set of rules that everybody agrees (“a social contract”). The development of transferring digital information through copper and fiber-optic lines, web addresses, programming languages and hardware set up the first stage of this society. This could be compare to the development of the basic “survival tools” of the society. We learn to make fire and build shelter in the digital world through the structure developed by the founders of the Internet. We survived primordial ooze ooze for almost 15 years. Then, we moved to the pushing the envelope of creation by add modules to the language of the Internet to allow for a democratization of the channels present in the World Wide Web.

According to Paul Graham the force behind “Web 2.0″ came from three factors; the root language Ajax, the democratization of the web and the knowledge to not mistreat those using the web. Under these three forces, the concept of web as platform could begin. We’ve lived, worked and play in this envirnoment for several years. But, it’s starting to feel that the platform will need to turn into something else in order to survive and to allow companies and individual to profit from their work. The next construct of the web will come from economic concern maybe more so than the ability to change the platform through technological/lingustical/mechanical means.

Access is one of the cornerstones of communication policies and regulations. There are two version of access that needs to be address in order for universal access to be available. Hardware availability and network connectivity comprise the first level of access, material access. Without these basic physical considerations, access to the online mediated public sphere is made virtually impossible. This access does not mean free connectivity, it means that the infrastructure must be there in order for those to connect with the interactive world.

The second type of access is more intangible. Literacy and awareness is necessary in maintaining the constant flow of information. Awareness covers the knowledge on how to use access to access relevant materials Also, there needs to be an access to the skills necessary to maintain a social presence in the mediated superstructure of the Internet.

During the time of Marx and Engels, the means of production for communication was control those with influence and power. A printing press was needed to produce most communication. The only way for newspapers, pamplets, or posters to be massively produced at that time was with the quickest and efficiency of the Guttenberg printing press. Now with the advent of the personal computer and the World Wide Web, many would-be publishers have a chance to express themselves to a larger audience. This paper will look at one of the simplest way to publish to a mass market, the blog.

This increase in wireless technology could be described as a “computer revolution.” Much like other social revolutions, there was a previous environment that dramatic changed by the introduction of a catalysis; in this case it was the ability to “post” information on a large network that could be viewed by others. This led to not only a hardware and software revolution (the creation of faster machines and programs that could utilize the speed and capability of the machine), but there was a social revolution. A new common language was introduction to the social environment. The non-violent revolution was achieved in the introduction of a new information age.

A blog (derived from “web-log”) is a web page made up of usually short, frequently updated posts that are arranged chronologically – similar to a “what’s new” page or journal. This method of communication allows the blog a method of expressing themselves with the media present in the everyday lives. It also allows for the creation of new media through the product techonologies that are readily available to the common man. Perhaps more importantly, to invoke Marx, blogs seize the means of production, bypassing the controller of the media and the means of production.  In some sense, blog posts are instant messages to the web.

Beyond the simple act of blogging comes the wealth of the individual worker in terms of cultural capital. Bloggers through shared social experiences, “insider information” and the intelligence of the individual writer collects this cultural capital. The strength of the individual post comes from the ability of the writer to connect with their potential audience. This ability is paid with the cultural capital of the blogger. The blogger’s topics then become one more support post in the social superstructure of society. However, similar to the idea that “[l]abour is not the source of all wealth” (Marx, 1875 from Tucker, 1978, 525), the cultural capital alone does not guarantee the connection with the audience or even acceptance within the social group. The creativity of the individual, along with “permission of the audience” (the blogger’s placement within the society) can the blog be seen as an active member of the blogosphere.

This fits with Marx’s idea of a classless society. Since we are living in an information age, then the capital of the society is the information produced by those living in the society. The blogosphere, which is “the collective term encompassing all… blogs; blogs as a community; blogs as a social network” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blogosphere), creates and maintains “the voice of the people.” If all members of a society have access to the same level of information, there is a “moderate” sense of equality and solidarity between the members of the society. Since blogs are embedded into the social subconscious, there is sense of integration between the wired and wireless worlds.

Blogging for all of its predicted “pomp and circumstance” is essentiality a modified diary for a public audience. Old fashion locks and felt covers have been replaced with neon signs encouraging all within distance and earshot to view, partake, and examine the “stream-of-conscience” flow from the audience. Stream-of-conscience is not completely referring to the author simply sitting in front of computer and typing the first idea that comes to her or his mind. It more denotes the idea that the blog author is free from the restrictions of the “journalistic method”, and by extension the prescribed norms of the Proletariat social agenda, and can focus on delivering the message to the audience. After the blogger adds his or her topic to the blog, audiences have a chance to react to the blog. They can either post to a forum, an indirect, reviewable response, or email the blogger directly, a direct, singular response. Through response or non-response, the audience completes its role of peer review and the blogger can start a new topic. All of these interactions connect with blogger with their peers and socializes the blogger within the superstructure of Internet society. 

Blogging has the ability to give a voice to the underrepresented. This open channel of communication provided by the Internet gives groups, who have no other method to express themselves to a large audience, a way of getting their message out to the public. Those who are disadvantaged through the social support system of society are given an opportunity to discuss issues that affect them. Access to the mainstream, participating majority of those people on the Internet (netizens) can raise awareness on key issues and raise capital needed to address those issues. The sphere of influence of the blog maybe limited due to the narrowcasting of the medium. However, when the sphere of the blog connects with the spotlight of mainstream media or public awareness, the impact of the blog can be moliminous.

There is still a presence of the Proletariat in the blogosphere. MSN Spaces, Yahoo! 360 and Blogger all have major corporate sponsorship and means of control. All of the major points of access have end-user agreements. These agreements have code-of-conduct agreements that can prevent certain content from appear on the blog. This content can include pornographic, hate-related materials, or potentially libel/slanderous material. These agreements can also limit how information is presented to their audience. This presentation may impact how the general audience receives information.

Perhaps the biggest Marxist influence present in blogging is what has been described as the “blogging lifestyle.” Since the means of production are “solely” in the hands of the blogger, the pressure of maintaining the blog is also solely in the hands of the blogger. The blog become stale and irrelevant in the overall wired social structure and perhaps the world in whole.

There is also a representative “division of labor” in the blogosphere. There are the personal diaries, which compose a majority of the blogs that exist. It is either the “stream-of-consciousness” analysis of the blogger or a personal diary of current events. These blogs represent the “communal cultural capital” of the society. It is the mundane experiences that form the base of the social superstructure of the online world. At this level, their “exclusive sphere of activity” (Marx, 1846 from Tucker, 1978, 176) is not established, as they are free to discuss any topic they wish. They have not been labeled an expert and are not separated from the rest of the personal bloggers.

The professional diaries are the next level of blogs in the blogosphere. This people are the “real-life experts” in their chosen fields. However, these people should be still be considered as members of the working class. They are not estranged from their work. They are being paid for their familiarity with their work. They have “creative control” over all of their creative works. Their work on blog can present a separation between the “working objectivity” and the “online objectivity.” When acting as an agent of a corporation, the blogger is expected to maintain a level of objectivity that represents the interests of the corporation. As an independent blogger, they are free from many of the restrictions. The blogger may be subject to retaliation from the corporation for the blog’s material.  This is one of a few “reaction controls” that the blogger may encounter. If the blogger works in an “open environment” they will not be exposed to this type of controls.

If computers are an advancement in Marx’s scheme of development and the evolution of commodity production, then one could argue that the blog format is a method of information consolidation to the masses. The problem is that not everybody in a society has access to the Internet. Therefore, there is a possibility of a class war.
A counter argument to this idea is by saying that “[o]wning … a blog,…, it needs to be said, does not constitute owning the means of production” (http://redcritique.org/WinterSpring2005/thedaydreamsofipodcapitalism.htm). The definition of the means of production in this example has changed from the ownership of the tools of production to being “free from exploitation—an exclusion even the most “sharing” of capitalists violently maintain today” (ibid).

One of the major works in cyberstudies is Donna Haraway’s “A Cyborg Manifesto”. Her argument is that she would rather be a cyborg as it is a “social reality… our most important political construction, a world-changing fiction.” This centerpiece of organic substance and mechanical precision forms the basis of Haraway’s religion. The boundary breakdowns listed by Haraway allows for the advancement of her cause. The biological-determinist ideology of the scientific community is broken down by the political- scientific conflict created by the intelligence design argument. Also, the distinction between man and machine is greatly subdued by the advancement in medical and communication technology. The physical and non-physical is becoming blurred as more emphasis is placed on information.

Haraway places all of her faith in “the illegitimate offspring of militarism and patriarchal capitalism, not to mention state socialism.” Her use of cyborg imagery in the article suggests a method of dealing with the dualisms that are present. The game of semantics with the use of cyborg literacy to create a body of work that is uniquely cyborg comes from intra-disciplinary approach to knowledge gathering. It uses the Internet as its main method of analysis and dissemination. The irony is that for the cyborg to connect to the populace in whole, it must disconnect from its source of support and information, the World Wide Web.

The problem that comes from all of the breakdowns and literature is that a cyborg cannot hope to become a separatist figure in its own “nation.” It must abide by the decisions of the connected group. This is where I would argue that the cyborg does have its limitations. Its “borgian” need to remain a part of the command-control-communication intelligence structure of the cyborg nation does limit the possibility of separate actions. The cyborg would remain connected to the whole. The whole is the cyborg’s method of nourishment. If we were to eliminate from the mix the cyborgs that need their mechanical parts for true survival (e.g. pacemaker patients), the remaining cyborgs would have only an “artificial need” for mechanical connect. This need could equal an addiction to the gratification that the web provides.

That is why I propose a new model of connecting to the Internet, that of the cybergod/cybergoddess. While cybergod/cybergoddess fails to remove the sexual nature from the user, it does introduce the possibility of the avataral representation of the user. This “cleaner” presentation of one’s self online adds a key element lacking in the cyborg model, the wireless. Cyborg, according to Haraway, Judith Squires and other cyberfeminists, must remain essentially in the materialist world to connect to the circuitry of the modern world. I would argue that cybergoddess could remove herself from the hardwire of the node and present herself online or offline without the “lag” associated with removal. Therefore, she is more powerful in both forms, online and offline, than the cyborg would be.

This question must be addressed before this blog can discuss the issues mentioned in the first article. Cyberstudies are more than the causal observation of the Internet and other similar modes of telecommunication. It must be conducted with the passion of scholastic interest, the zeal of discovering connections and applied to the strict methodology of research. Steven G. Jones described in Virtual Culture (2002) that cyberstudies was the discussion of the discussion of “the communal, the social relationships…via the Internet and CMC” (9) and “its bias toward time, and not space, thought the Internet’s principal and popular definition is as a ‘cyberspace’.” (12, original emphasis included)

Most importantly, it is the observation of recording of the shockwaves created in the banded sea of the mediated public sphere. If one were to subscribe to the superstring theory of communication, than the smaller remark in an obscure cyberjournal can impact the broader cybercommunity and the outside unconnected world. The cybersociety creates, according to Christine Hine’s Virtual Ethnography, social formations through the polymorphic environment of the Internet, WAPweb or other interconnective methods of CMC. The non-traditional groupings are created by interest and not spatial requirements can take “shared social experiences” of the group for the purpose of analysis, discussion or exhibition.

Cyberstudies should not be forced to limit itself in the cold confines of the server rooms or the vacuum of the chat rooms. The research can be conducted through the new connection points of the net (e.g. Web Accessible Phones) and the new technologies that allow for greater access to the masses. This calls for educated “future sight” not simply a game of “cheat the prophet” as discussed by GK Chesterton that keeps “the masses dark.”  One should account for the trends of technology and trends of social acceptance to newer information.