This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Culture in the age of the Internet
Hello Tedsters!
I wold like to start a new debate. I was quite surprised to see that no one has been discussing this subject so far at TED Conversations. We speak about technology, science and changes in the society, but it seems as we have forgotten about the culture, and how the new technologies change it.
I wold like to focus your attention to the changes in the culture that are caused by the Internet. This wonderful global network, that allows instant transfer of any intellectual content to almost any place on Earth. Seems brilliant, doesn't it? But have you noticed that the whole world is now watching the same movies, listening to the same music and reading the same books? I wonder if that is a good thing that slowly we are loosing our diversity? Maybe we should somehow protect local differences? Or maybe we should act in opposite direction? Doesn't it annoy you that living outside a specific region you can't access legally some content? I understand the legal and commercial reason why i.e. Hulu or Pandora are available only to U.S residents, but should it be so? Maybe the whole word should have equal access to all the cultural and intellectual wealth?
But if we would like to provide easy access for everyone to the "cultural products", witch I strongly believe should happen, how to protect the author's right to profit from it? Is the DRM the right answer? I don't think so, but honestly I can't come up with a better one.
I hope someone will find these topics as interesting as I do. The world is changing whether we want it or not. I think we need to find answers for these questions, because otherwise we will end up regretting that we missed the opportunity to steer this process that we still have now.
Nicholas Lukowiak 50+
Cultures are what separate the world the most, what is/are involved in the details of each individual nation's cultures, subcultures, sub-subcultures, etc. is what divides people within nations.
These cultures that people are born into, grow into, move into, change to, fight for, or any other fashion in which to live life within create who we are and what our values and ethics are. We are all products of multiply cultures clashing at this point in time. Internet is speeding this up as Marcin gives example to.
"Culture" has 3 major meanings (sourcing Wikipedia):
- Excellence of taste in the fine arts and humanities, also known as high culture
- An integrated pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behavior that depends upon the capacity for symbolic thought and social learning
- The set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterizes an institution, organization or group
Ignore one, that is also a cultural interpretation, opinions about art are not facts. I know circular logic, but bare with me.
Number two, to me, sounds a lot like what religion is considered. A culturist, advocates what good their culture can do. Their culture is what they believe (in) to be beneficial to the word. "Atheist Movement" "Gay Movement" "Animal Rights Movement" "Civil Rights M" "African American M" are just some of the cultures that produced significant change to America. The problem is, these people were forced to become sub-cultures and sub-subcultures rather than originally being equal in the debate. A competition among cultures can be interpreted when protest, crimes, revolts, rebellion, divides, and any other social movement.
Number three, again, community.
Communities are formed to protect each other. We humans need to allow one global culture for a world united, it will ultimately happen by constant culture clashes anyways.
Arnoldo Jimenez
Marcin Kasiak 200+
Nicholas Lukowiak 50+
Bernd Fesel 30+
The internet - I believe - is at least for the moment showing more of diversity existing in our world. how would I know otherwise of these great TED talks in L.A., the Jazz in Chicago or foto-school in Düsseldorf?
So the question is different: is internet - while showing more diversity as ever before - reduce diversity today or for the future? isn´t this a paradox?
Marcin Kasiak 200+
I wonder what do you think about the idea that the published music now days should be threated more like a cost of marketing and the real revenue is in the live concerts and collectible items? Do you think it is realistic? Because I have many doubts.
What do you think about e-books? You say that DRM is the answer within the old system. But how could we protect profits for the authors without it?
To answer your question I think that there is no paradox in this situation. In my opinion it is similar to the situation with communicating vessels. When we allow the transfer of information between different cultures eventually they will merge and equalize.
By the why have you noticed how the Internet has become something so ubiquitous that we don't write its name with capital letter anymore.
John Madsen
Tim blackburn 30+
Nicholas Lukowiak 50+
Marcin Kasiak 200+
Michael McLoughlin
I love the global citizen mentality. I think that this mentality is going to come onto the world in full force and that it is possibly the greatest thing that will ever happen. It's happening now. Our generation is pioneering it and wondering what comes next. But very very soon there won't be a anyone alive who remembers a world without the internet. People will grow up learning to connect from the beginning, with people everywhere. We'll be able to see humanity across any distance without fearing the unknown because there won't be any unknown. No more distant scary lands, only mangled stereotypes that just don't hold together anymore, leaving a world of human solidarity.
Anyways,
I do not believe that this implies the loss of culture. If you mean, in a distinct local sense, of course! Such a thing was bound to happen eventually. However, I think, most importantly, we're building a global culture that compliments our local ones. One can see such phenomena in any country already. There are national values that everyone is tied to, but local values that keep it fresh. The world culture will be like this.
Altogether, the internet is a great landscape of all bits human, generated in some small part by almost everyone in the world. Before long, it will really be everyone in the world. With this will come not uniformity but eclecticism, diversity, and innovation on the grandest scale ever known.
Dong-Kuen Oh
However it didn't change everything. Many countries, almost every, still maintain their own culture. In my mother country, South Korea, we still respect and bow our elders, teachers and love our own traditional culture.
The internet does same thing that the industrial revolution did. It will change the world and each country's culture but it is impossible for the internet to wipe up the indigenous cultures.
Finally, I hope you see this Ted : http://www.ted.com/talks/jay_walker_on_the_world_s_english_mania.html
Thank you
Scott Armstrong 50+
I'm not sure how to define 'culture' other than the changing ways in which we live our daily lives.
The internet will change attitudes. Privacy, for example, is undergoing a huge re-definition and the 'establishment' isn't keeping up with the 'kids' to use a delightful colloquialism from '60's counter-culture.
Good ideas will always reveal their merit and gossip will always spread seemingly faster than the technology can disseminate it. Systems of faster communication will never generate great ideas, only allow them to be shared which highlights the absolute necessity for free and uncensored sharing of information to and for everyone.
Vilo Rei
Once upon a time, during the industrial revolution, there's was a medium-sized town welcoming the railways: the big city would be closer and the medium-sized town expected people and investments coming from the big city. What happened? The big city attracted the most talented people and provided the perfect place to invest. This is a true and common story for many towns: ease of communication tends to reinforce the strong.
Internet is not the first quantum leap in communication. Each innovation came with its grand design—and its reality. Printing, with the Bible for all—and the Protestantism; radio, with international broadcasting—and totalitarian propaganda; TV with realtime Apollo landing in Moon—and reality shows; internet with open and free culture—and questions like this very conversation.
What are the specifics of internet: everything, everywhere, every time. Sounds familiar? Sure, these are the very attributes of God: omniscient, omnipresent, eternal. And incidentally a major temptation for internet users.
Let's consider the word used in Germany for internet: infobahn. The autobahn in Germany were built during the Reich for strategic reasons: ease the move of tanks. Is the infobahn a strategic tool to promote and impose American entertainment? Here comes the story about the medium-sized town and the big city.
Entertainment products may be protected by DRMs, but "culture" as civilisation is DRM-free. I personally doubt that internet is compatible with "culture" as civilisation, because of its God-like attributes. It may take a long time for internet being polished and civilised before it becomes a true cultural vector.
History has transformed a printed book from a tool to a civilisation support: time will do the same with internet.
anthony bruni 30+
Karthik Krishnamurthy
The whole world might have access to the same movies, books, and music (there are caveats of course), but everyone accesses different types of content. The ability to strike up conversations among common interests through the internet also creates sub-cultures based on personal interests and personality traits - people get together with those that think alike, and have more interesting and enriching conversations.
What is normally brought up when discussing the loss of culture due to globalization is losing out on historical values, traditions and art forms. I am of the view that sub-cultures are far more representative of individuals, since they reflect personal choices and decisions as opposed to ones that people have much less control over. So, while we may be losing our 'cultural' diversity, the possibility of forming unique sub-cultures based on preferences and inclinations is probably bringing everyone closer together, and helping people get in touch with their own true opinions.
Essentially, the internet is actually maintaining and increasing our diversity of thought by allowing people to get in touch with any niche they would like, which is (to me) more important than diversity of traditions and rituals.
Tim Colgan 50+
The analogy between the internet and written language is an interesting one. Both are technologies that enhance communication amongst masses of people.
It seems like the foundation of your conversation has a lot to do with the homogenization of culture (and the resultant loss of separate sub-cultures). Could we extend the analogy to written language and ask - did written language in the form of sacred scriptures also result in the homogenization of culture? Perhaps in the standardization of thinking that religion brought, via writing, there was a similar effect that we can learn from.
Marcin Kasiak 200+
Robert-David Steele-Vivas
Review: Philosophy and the Social Problem–The Annotated Edition
http://www.phibetaiota.net/2008/10/philosophy-and-the-social-problem-the-annotated-edition/
Review: The Lessons of History
http://www.phibetaiota.net/2004/01/the-lessons-of-history/
QUOTE from latter: They end with “the only lasting revolution is in the mind of man.” In other words, technology is not a substitute for thinking by humans.
Culture is most precious for its ability to sustain a diversity of world experience IMHO. Every language that dies is a culture that dies. Just as with the other species, we are killing off what could be our most precious resource, indigenous cultures with a historical memory of man-nature co-creation and co-relation that we desperately need to restore.
Zdenek Smith 100+
I think globalization of entertainment is a good thing because it will make the market more competitive. You can already see movies from around the world competing for audience in US as well. US also produces many low quality movies so allowing people to use Internet to access movies from other countries will spread different cultures that were previously contained within limited area.
However I recognize that some of the US entertainment esp. the "reality" dating shows are not good examples of real life relationships. We need exposure to more options and I am sure we can find both entertaining and educational shows from all around the world.
Marcin Kasiak 200+
I would also like to ask you for your opinion on the other subject of this discussion. If however we agree the globalization by unobstructed access to cultural products should be something worth aiming for, do you have any ideas how could we achieve that goal without hurting the right of the authors to profit from their work? Right now our distribution systems are based on belief that the customers are mainly thieves only waiting to copy what they have bought and put it on the Internet. So the e-books, music and all other media are being protected by DRM. As a result the customers are having problems with what they have bought, and - since there are no unbreakable security measures - people who obtained these goods in other way can use them with o complications.
These are things that have been said many times before and everybody knows about them, but nothing chances.
Do you think that any other distribution model wold be possible, and what would have to change to make it happen? Would it be as simple as changing the laws, or maybe we really are thieves and it is the society that would have to change?
Vasil Rangelov 50+
The music industry has found it though live concerts and souvenirs (e.g. T-Shirts).
Shows have found it though video adverisments (well... that's not exactly a discovery, it's just a successful port of the old model onto the internet).
Similar thing (i.e. ads) has been done on e-book-like websites, though not to e-books themselves. For some reason (I'm guessing offline access and ad absense), many people still prefer an e-book over a big-e-book-like website read, and some (definetly not me...) are even willing to pay for e-book.
Advertisments, as well as souvenirs are not exactly appropriate for movies though (doable, but will do more harm than good). So there's still a large revenue stream to be discovered there.
Marcin Kasiak 200+
Vilgot Huhn 10+
But I do spend a lot of time on the internet and one of the things that worries me is, even tough there are a great deal of niched and serious works of art out there, the thing that get spread are almost exclusively comedy. Don't get me wrong, I love comedy, but I love other things too. When it comes to viral trends there's a typical "high school in-confidence" thingy going on! Everyone you know sees what you say when you say something on facebook, so it takes great courage to say something controversial, or (in this case) to link something you're not sure that your friends will like. So at the end of the day, the thing people are comfortable linking is funny youtube clips and the occasional comic strip, and I just think there's so much more to the world than "lol that's funny". Sometimes it's stimulating and fun to deal with serious or interesting content. Sometimes I'm afraid people my age can't take anything seriously anymore since they expect everything to be comedy, comedy comedy!
Tough maybe this tendency isn't as real as I believe and I just have this perspective because all my friends are teenagers like me.
btw TED is a beautiful exception to this tendency. :)
Vasil Rangelov 50+
While yes, this conversation doesn't often happen in cyberspace, it doesn't have to be this way. As you said, TED itself is just the best example. Facebook could be, but only for issues that you can potentially do something about, like education issues for example, morality issues or [insert whatever your hobby is] issues.
Also, the right comedy itself can be a gateway to more serious issues. In fact, some of the more serious issues I'm talking about were often raised in comedy TV talk shows, following news casts. Yes, a LOLCat doesn't help, but something like "The Daily Show" or the "Union News Network" (google them...) does.
Vilo Rei
Is TED promoting a specific culture (content) or providing a platform (container)?
I know container are not culture agnostic, so we have the same question twice:
• what is the implicit culture of TED as a container?
• what is the implicit culture of TED as a content?
Vasil Rangelov 50+
So, while the majority of content on TED is prompting "western" culture (the common parts of it), the platform/container itself allows for eastern culture to be presented.
Mark Meijer 100+
Vilo Rei
• In France, the classic view of "culture" is linked with the ability to create a masterpiece that fits with its time, but there's no specific word for the products delivered by today's entertainment industry, hence the confusion.
• In the German meaning, "culture" is closer to civilisation and includes the representations shared by the community members.
• In the (English or) American acceptance, it seems closer to the way of living, with values and behaviours.
Now, for the French culture, and based on CNRS researcher Dominique WOLTON's work, there are no longer two kinds of cultures, elitist and mainstream, but four:
1• Cosmopolite, which is no longer linked to a country or a civilisation. It is the result of post-modernism for a global minority of "happy few", but unconnected to the other forms.
2• Elitist, which refers to Molière, Shakespeare, Goethe, Cervantes (one per country) but refuses to consider contemporary realisations as culture. It is a minority now but a powerful social connector.
3• Mass-media, which is a mix of promotion and destruction of the previous elitist form. Main approach is consumerism.
- Promotion, with the hugely popular Louvre museum, as a result of combined democracy, higher living standard and better education.
- But destruction also, when Walt Disney animated films over-write Perrault's tales, as a product delivered by a powerful and lucrative entertainment industry.
4• Popular, as the true Perrault tales and gastronomy recipes. It shares the same attributes with the elitist culture (minority and powerful social connector) and connects easily with it. This popular culture could also be linked to a minority, ethnic or religious group.
To make things more difficult: one single person could behave according to more than one kind of culture!
Back to the question, my answer is another question: "how internet is shaping the concept of culture?"
Marcin Kasiak 200+
I love your post. With that single question you have falsified my hypothesis about unification of wold culture :)
I didn't realize that this word can have so different meanings in different languages. In Polish word "kultura" is very broad term and means whole spiritual and material achievements of society, also characteristic patterns of behavior in a population.
To answer your question I would have to ask another one: which "culture"? If we are discussing French understanding of the term with the classification you have presented I would say that the Internet is strengthening mass-media. Right now every one knows what Louvre is, but I had to check Wikipedia for Perrault.
As we obviously have a different comprehension of the word "culture" I have trouble understanding what do you mean by "one single person could behave according to more than one kind of culture!". Do you mean it as a set of rules one can obey?
Vilo Rei
I would freely translate "kultura" into a grander word, civilisation. When I did the Tchestokova pilgrimage in 1984, I remember that candles, hand-kissing, flowers, respectful "you" (French "vous" opposed at "tu", for one person) were proudly presented as "kultura" by my Polish friends. This was how they were resisting against the materialistic communist regime—with the success all we know.
Perrault wrote some fairy tale as Little Red Riding Hood, Sleeping Beauty, Puss in Boots, Cinderella, Bluebeard, Hop o' My Thumb. As they are based on folk tales, they are the perfect example of connection between popular culture going elitist, not to mention Tchaikovsky's Sleeping Beauty ballet. So civilisation includes both elitist and popular cultures.
About multi-level cultural behaviours: one person could eat fast-food and consumes Walt Disney products (mass-media), enjoy a classic tragedy at La Comédie Française (elitist), goes to Bayreuth for Wagner (cosmopolite) and enjoy a traditional pot-au-feu (popular).
I agree with you that internet is mainly mass-media level not per se but because it promotes a very American-oriented acceptance of culture and culture, ie products to buy.
However, let's remember internet is just a tool: a fast, ubiquitous, infinite tube.
Two real challenges:
1• One can't understand foreign culture if he/she doesn't know his/hers own culture. Do know your own culture first! Or, more catchy: be civilised before meeting with barbarians!
2• How to use internet to promote our vision of culture, ie. "kultura" of civilisation, which is authentically European?
To be continued...
Marcin Kasiak 200+
We must remember that the language is a product of a culture/civilization. It carries a sort of philosophy, a way we see the world, problems and other people. The best example for what I mean is how we talk to each other in different languages. In Polish, when you speak to unknown adult you have to address them Pan/Pani (Sir/Madam), in German you would use in this situation third person plural, wheres in English there is no special form for such an occasion. There is just "you".
As my words limit is ending I will address second challenge later.
Marcin Kasiak 200+
I think that before exporting our culture outside the Europe we should focus on promoting it within the continent. Even though almost all European states are now in EU, and we have free-trade policy, we still don't have laws allowing for easy distribution of digital content within the EU. I understand that it is caused by distribution model that we have now, but for me it means that the model has to be changed. And that is something that should be done on the Brussels level.
Zdenek Smith 100+
Now we need to make also available good entertainment that exists in other countries through the Internet to the world.
Marcin Kasiak 200+
Zdenek Smith 100+
Marcin Kasiak 200+
Zdenek Smith 100+
I only think that many US movies can stand on their own as well. While their promotion helps, I think their entertainment and sometimes educational value attracts people too. I lived in former Soviet Eastern block and we had zero promotion on US movies but people loved to watch them for various reasons I mentioned above.
As with music, many US companies created distribution channels and have strong grip on influencing what movies will be shown in theaters. Fortunately in age of the Internet, YouTube and Netflix I think we will see a different trend.
Again, I think we agree on the same. We need to promote films from all over the world so that people have choice and directors from other countries can be known abroad =)
bk behun
Vilo Rei
The Louvre is elitist / mass-media for French and elitist / cosmopolite for people living far away.
I remember an American friend visiting Paris: he asked me to see one specific painting he used to study and copy when he was a child at school. As I was his coach in Paris, we duly went to the Louvre and he saw the painting for real! Personally, I go and visit the Louvre quite often, selecting one specific section at a time. It's just part of the landscape.
When I visited North California some years ago, I was deeply interested in the National Parks and the Napa Valley, and the wine. I don't remember the Alcatraz prison, although I did visit it.
What I want to say is, each of us we're carrying our own culture with us. The magic happens when our own culture allows each of us to interact with others. That's why I wrote "be civilised before meeting the barbarians".
As a barbarian (I'm not American), I can't judge your culture but, as a civilised person (I'm European), I do talk with you. Same for you: as a barbarian (you're not European), you can't judge my culture but, as a civilised person (you're American), you do talk with me.
So as civilised / barbarians both at the same time, we're even and we're equal. And the culture provides the inter-se, the between-us, the link that defines and makes mankind.
loop johnny 30+
Try viewing alien visitors coming to earth. They would refer to our customs and particularities as belonging to human culture.
Matthew Labarge
Marcin Kasiak 200+
Matthew Labarge
Vasil Rangelov 50+
That's not exactly true... the whole world is watching US movies, listening US music and reading US books... but they consume the best of those in addition to whatever their local equivalents have to offer.
For example, since I'm a Bulgarian, I listen some Bulgarian music in addition to the popular world names, and I'm sure you listen to (or at least you're aware of) some Polish music yourself. You're probably not as familiar with Bulgarian signers as me, and I'm surely not as familiar with Polish singers as you (whatever your knowledge is, mine is zero, so you win :-P). But if I say "Lady Gaga", I'm guessing we can all say "Yes, I know her".
A similar thing can be said about movies and books, though in the case of books, I'm not much of a book reader (as many techies).
There was a TEDTalk related to this topic... let's see... ah, there it is:
www.ted.com/talks/ethan_zuckerman.html
So... it boils down to diversity being there, but with us isolating ourselves in social silos of sorts.
Marcin Kasiak 200+
Vasil Rangelov 50+
But wasn't that true even before the age of the internet? Before the fall of the iron curtain? Yes, this has been accelerated with the web, but older rock music (for one example) is similar to the US rock music of the same time... the only thing that changed was the transmission of ideas, which is now easier, while it was previously only done by people to travel abroad and "smuggle" arts when coming back.
I guess there's only so much genres that could exist and remain broad enough to allow for creativity. Folk songs are the only kind of songs that have always been (and still are) unique to each culture. And there's a semi-dogma about people creating new songs in this style. I say "semi" because with enough pop twists added, singers will usually be "forgiven", but if they mimic things too much, "traditionalists" tend to protest... at least that's the case here, but I'd assume it's a similar situation for any country's folk music.
P.S. With Polish and Bulgarian both being slavonic languages, you can be sure that non-slavs won't tell them apart :-P.
Hugo Venturini 20+
The conclusion is that the whole world is not watching the same movies and reading the same books. Our accidental world seems to, I agree.
I strongly encourage you to read this book.
On another topic, I am opposed to DRMs the way they are proposed nowadays because it, most od the time, bounds a content to a specific player, hence tying: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_(commerce)
Marcin Kasiak 200+
Karthik Krishnamurthy
While my friends know what it is, this in no way means we are merging. In fact, as I interact more with others that share my tastes, receive suggestions, explore other things related to what I already like - the more we diverge. It is the same with others as well, people in the "same interest" groups merge with each other, but diverge from others.... simple because there are underlying ways of thinking and tastes that result in the formation of groups in the first place
Debra Smith 200+
Ahmet Yükseltürk 500+
Marcin Kasiak 200+