Kit·blog — Comments on “Digital proletarianism”

Kit·blog Comments — netstalker on “Digital proletarianism”

Mon, 25 Dec 2006 01:07:45 +0200

Reply no.: 1. On 25 Dec 2006, 1:07 AM, netstalker wrote: ]]>

i started with the idea of writing something foolish. i then re-read your post. i changed my mind. you are perfectly right with the status-quo of the internet-content today and the critic brought to the editorial. let me end my until now completely useless comment with following questions: could it be a goal to bring average joe to post quality content, that is, is it worth struggeling to achieve such a possible goal? is it achievable? am i totally wrong asking this?

Any thoughts? Reply to this comment.
Too narrow? Subscribe to global comments feed.

Kit·blog Comments — Kit on “Digital proletarianism”

Mon, 25 Dec 2006 22:12:46 +0200

Reply no.: 2. On 25 Dec 2006, 10:12 PM, Kit wrote: ]]>

In black and white: user created content can be seen either as freedom of speech, thus an invaluable sub-product of democracy and diversity, or as a mostly useless noise-flooded signal. There are many shades of gray in between those two extremes. My all-black, skewed post tries to re-balance a boat tilted by the biased, all-white Time feature.

I don’t think that user-generated content’s quality can be improved, nor should it be, elite status is not achievable (not even desirable) by everyone. Mediocrity is an inevitable state of the nature — the very substance that makes excellence possible. Without mediocrity greatness would not exist.

But that doesn’t mean that mediocrity should be glorified, either, as Times Magazine does — we should recognize and pay respect to elites, role models and exceptional work.

Any thoughts? Reply to this comment.
Too narrow? Subscribe to global comments feed.

Kit·blog Comments — Prislea on “Digital proletarianism”

Tue, 26 Dec 2006 20:57:10 +0200

Reply no.: 3. On 26 Dec 2006, 8:57 PM, Prislea wrote: ]]>

“that doesn’t mean that mediocrity should be glorified, either, as Times Magazine does” I`d rather say it`s clever advertising, since Internet also means big business, but it`s the same thing you said, only in a mild politically correct manner

I won`t write the “c” word… but cha know, I have boomarked your blog in the “Attitude” cathegory B)

Any thoughts? Reply to this comment.
Too narrow? Subscribe to global comments feed.

Kit·blog Comments — Bo on “Digital proletarianism”

Sat, 28 Jul 2007 11:21:00 +0200

Reply no.: 4. On 28 Jul 2007, 11:21 AM, Bo wrote: ]]>

Sorry for hotlinking the image without your authorization, it’s been deleted

Any thoughts? Reply to this comment.
Too narrow? Subscribe to global comments feed.

Kit·blog Comments — kit on “Digital proletarianism”

Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:35:50 +0200

Reply no.: 5. On 28 Jul 2007, 1:35 PM, kit wrote: ]]>

Thank you, Bo.

Any thoughts? Reply to this comment.
Too narrow? Subscribe to global comments feed.

Kit·blog Comments — Gulbin on “Digital proletarianism”

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 06:25:50 +0200

Reply no.: 6. On 11 Aug 2008, 6:25 AM, Gulbin wrote: ]]>

kit,
sooner or, rather later, excellence will be recognised and accepted.

Any thoughts? Reply to this comment.
Too narrow? Subscribe to global comments feed.