Hi Ruth (and Michel), Thanks for your insightful comment.
While I am in overall agreement and have strong collegial sympathy with the p2p movement I'm not exactly sure how they avoid what I think is a central dilemma of "networks" and "networking" at least as used in contemporary parlance. The problem that I have is, as I say in the blogpost: "whose will be the "louder" voices providing the content and context in these networks; what content will they be providing; how relevant will it be to the needs of the excluded and the marginalized"; and in particular in response to your comment Ruth: "overall what measures might be in place to ensure that the softer and weaker voices-those representing the urban and rural poor, indigenous people in both Developed but particularly in Developing Countries; the landless and the migrants-are in fact heard and responded to and even given value, legitimacy and resonance within these networks." My point is that simply taking "networks" and those who are networked as they might present themselves is likely to be insufficient--in fact as I argue elesewhere in that blogpost--the networks are likely to simply amplify existing inequalities. If one is interested in not simply reproducing (or enhancing) existing structures of social inequality through networks and networking one must actively intervene so as to facilitate some degree of "effective use" of those networks by folks on the wrong side of what we might call the "data divide". M -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of ruth catlow Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2011 4:43 AM To: [email protected]; Michel Bauwens Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] FW: Blogpost: Louder Voices and Learning Networks Thanks Michael and Simon, What i find most fascinating and chilling about this stuff is how easy it is, by engaging with the mainstream culture around "networked learning" and "social networking", to internalise neoliberal values and propagate infrastructural developments that support the marketisation of every thing at every level; and endlessly recreate new domains in which inequalities are reproduced and amplified- whilst forgetting to pay attention to what other social or human relations and material realities are being simultaneously created. I look forward to reading more on empyre about "alternative models to the marketisation and instrumentalisation of creativity and innovation". I think some of the most useful thinking I have encountered lately around these ideas have been through the network of people working at the Foundation for P2P alternatives http://p2pfoundation.net/ cheers Ruth On 26/06/11 11:33, Simon Biggs wrote: > All true - but there is another side to the story. The internet has > democratised access to the means of production and distribution of > knowledge. But at the same time corporate and government agents are > working to counter this, with proposals for the marketisation of > knowledge. Neo-liberal free-marketeers are hard at work ensuring that > knowledge, in all its aspects, will be subject the market forces and > processes they espouse and profit from. This is evidenced in the UK > governments current proposal to establish a commodity trading floor in > the City of London for intellectual property. The idea is that just as > speculators trade oil or wheat they will be able to trade the rights > to what we know and understand, whether it is a patent, publication, > recording or artefact. This has profound implications for those who > work with knowledge - artists, authors, musicians, inventors, > researchers and others. > > In July there will be a discussion on this topic on empyre, > considering alternative models to the marketisation and > instrumentalisation of creativity and innovation. The intent is to > articulate alternatives before the corporate drum-beat leading to > IP-marketisation gathers pace. Hopefully those involved in related > discussion on Netbehaviour and idc will join in the debate. > > Best > > Simon > > > On 26/06/2011 01:13, "michael gurstein"<[email protected]> wrote: > >> Louder Voices and Learning Networks http://wp.me/pJQl5-76 >> >> Posted on June 25, 2011 by Michael Gurstein >> >> There is a stream of contemporary thought (with which I generally >> agree) which sees knowledge as being largely produced and >> disseminated by and through networks. That is, networks-social, >> technical, organizational-are seen as providing the basic framework >> within which knowledge activities increasingly are taking place and >> where knowledge workers increasingly are doing their work. >> >> This all seems really quite straightforward and even somehow >> commendable in that it suggests that knowledge is being disengaged >> from the older top-down authoritarian structures and institutions >> which so many have come to distrust or even despise. And of course, >> these networks are (or at least appear to be) immaterial and >> placeless-existing or taking their form and substance through >> invisible wires, the ether, software such as Facebook, or other >> seemingly virtual products, themselves the outcome of the digital >> age. >> >> An upcoming conference "Mobilityshifts" is as good as any as an >> example of this kind of thinking-asserting in a somewhat breathless >> way that "The future of learning will not be solely determined by >> digital culture but by the re-organization of power relationships and >> institutional protocols."... http://wp.me/pJQl5-76 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > Simon Biggs > [email protected] > http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ > > [email protected] > http://www.elmcip.net/ > http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ > > > > Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, > number SC009201 > > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
