Welcome Guest. | Log In| Register | Membership Benefits


The Big Picture: Why We Need New Media

Old media cannot be fixed, no matter which new technology is used

By Mark Stahlman
Issue column appeared: July 17, 1995

Why do we need new media? After all, what's wrong with the old media? Plenty. The vain and manipulative star-making machine is wrong. The shameless blending of news and entertainment is wrong. The mad scramble for ratings is wrong. The smug insider/elite-control-over-editorial-decisions stance is wrong. The basic premise of one to many, us-versus-them broadcasting of propaganda is wrong. Old media is wrong media.

But be careful. Old media shouldn't be confused with any specific technology. It's an attitude, a cultural phenomenon. It's a business model. It's a cluster of industries. It's a collection of assumptions about who we are, what we want, what we'll pay for, and who should be in control. It's top down. It's big, rich, and well-connected. And--it's wrong.

Take Diane Sawyer's recent ABC PrimeTime Live "interview" with Michael Jackson and Lisa Marie Presley-Jackson. Where was the talent? Where was the excitement? Where was the meaning? Where was the imagination? Nowhere.

Instead, a group of people who are simultaneously the manipulators and the manufactured creatures of old media staged a self promotion while congratulating themselves on their ability to use their system. Of course, it worked. Special effects were gorgeously produced. Images were carefully burnished. And, yes, crimes were decriminalized.

Why should we care? Why not just fold every new technology into the old media? Why not transform every commercial into a blinding, 3-D ra y-traced extravaganza? Why not just put the culture, corruption, and the people-are-sheep point of view of old media online 24 hours a day? Why don't we just upload Hollywood?

We're already doing that. And some people will get so excited, they will proclaim this technology migration to be the much-anticipated "digital convergence." Some will even insist on describing as "new media" the inevitable adoption of these new technologies by old industries. But it's just the same old media racket. The game hasn't changed at all, just the outer trappings. The people are the same. Their lives and attitudes are the same. It's the latest style--a new frock being stretched over the frame of the same old media.

Seeds Of Rebellion
That's not good enough. We've come much too far to settle for a fresh coat of paint. We haven't come through a century of failed utopian social experiments and untold casualties in countless wars, only to be told that Michael Jackson actually matters. Or that this freakish m egalomaniac is a caring philanthropic beacon of world peace. Do not underestimate the rejection that old media stands for. It's all around us--on back roads, in the junior high schools, and in the ghettos. But it's still only a rejection and not yet a rebellion.

How and when will we get a truly New Media? When enough people can articulate why old media is wrong, and express their ideas of what might be the right road by creating a new industry. New industries are invariably created by rebels--rebels with a cause. That's precisely what the true mavens of New Media are.

What's the cause that will motivate these New Media rebels? The same as it was for old media--to create a new society. We are already well into the process of redefining who we are. The other old questions--what we want, what we'll pay for it, and who should be in control--also will need new answers. Ask the questions, and you will understand why we need New Media. Answer them, and you will be creating the future.

Comments on this story?

InformationWeek http://techweb.cmp.com/iwk