101 Culture

This is a blog about the emergence of a digital culture. What might it look like? What can we see already?

And all my other details are kept at benmason.org.


Searching openness

Obox Signature Series

Culturally digital comedy from Baratunde Thurston

Here's a presentation from comedian Baratunde Thurston at Web2.0 conference.

He talks about a couple of comedy experiments that he started on Twitter and a multitude that he was involved with or watched.

It's well worth a watch. And watch it considering the topics I bang on about on this blog: That with digital media and the internet everything is becoming more collaborative and open. And also how successful ideas start small and public and then grow a evolve with participation.

The audience/producer line is very blurred in the examples Thurston gives. The two projects he founded are comedy collaborations that start with a single tweet. They then grow and evolve into other media, as I've discussed here before.

Nice work.

Value music and pizza, not records

Lily Allen takes a stand against FAC, the group of artists that is speaking out against the governments plans to cut the internet connection of 'music pirates'.

But all her thoughts come from a desire to protect the industry, not protect music. "you get a huge debt from your record company, which you spend years working your arse off to repay. When you manage to get a contract, all those pretty videos and posters advertising your album have to be paid for and as the artist, you have to pay for them"

The recent music industry has been built around recording technology. The record was the item of perceived value. The first album was sold in 1909. The industry has honed itself to produce records, mostly polished collections of 3.5 minute tracks.

But consider a definition of music: "an artistic form of auditory communication incorporating instrumental or vocal tones in a structured and continuous manner". It's a form of communication. The internet has made communication cheaper and easier. It should be a great thing for music.

We may lose a few record labels. We may lose some recording studios.

But people still desire great music. So there will be commercial value in it somewhere. People just need to think a bit more laterally. I was in a pizzeria last week and someone made a simple point. In that situation, we're willing to pay for pizza and beer. But the cutlery, table, chairs and plates are considered free. Even the music in the background is considered free.

So if there is to be a large music industry, it needs to adjust its model so that recordings are perceived as free or cheap, because as I've previously explained, they're not scarce anymore, but that something else in the music is expensive.  Either make recordings much cheaper to produce and easier to buy or hide the cost in something of greater perceived value. I'd recommend trying both.

UPDATE:
A song pushed my way by @shakeandvac

"Re-issue ! Re-package ! Re-package !
Re-evaluate the songs
Double-pack with a photograph
Extra Track (and a tacky badge)"

More piracy/privacy bungling from our government

The UK government has published an amendment to the Digital Britain Report which suggests cutting off the internet connection of "hardcore pirates". The BBC article also suggests "illegal downloaders" will be penalised.

We know that a hardcore minority of people share lots of content. But cutting off their network connection seems drastic. The risk of cutting off the innocent parent because their child has shared some insignificant pop song online cuts at the very heart of the freedom of speech. The next step after this is scanning all emails to check copyright content, akin to opening all our mail.

The issue to solve here is how to support the creative industries. This is the only viable reason for worrying about file-sharing. This discussion is best summed up by the mistake of confusing a "music industry" with a "record industry". The record industry was built off the back of recording technology. Music is recorded and distributed on vinyl, tapes and then CDs. These copies are scarce and therefore valuable. Massive profits ensued.

But now digital code and the internet has made it almost free to distribute copies of music. The recordings are not scarce anymore. So there isn't much value in them.

This is the record industry, not the music industry.

So if the government wants to ensure the value of its music industry, it needs to help it find a valuable product. Music is as relevant as ever. And the artists have talent that is scarce and therefore valuable. We've also developed an amazing distribution system called the internet which means an artist could access an audience of billions at very low cost. Surely there must be a reason to celebrate in there. Cash aside, we can spread brilliant music to everyone at low cost. And an artist can build a relationship with their audience, like Imogen Heap does well. This creates additional value in her live performances, her merchandise, even her records.

The record industry will never be worth what it was. Copies are almost ubiquitous. And let's support artists in finding an audience and creating something scarce and valuable in their work. If art is to be commercialised then do it well, like Rockstar selling tracks within GTA IV.

Let's not restrict the very freedom on which the internet is based in order to persecute a few teenagers sharing files. By all means, keep distribution of copyrighted material as illegal, and persecute those that seek to profit illegally from the copyright of others. But realise that trying to stop file-sharing by restricting the flow of information is a perversion of the internet, detrimental to our future and will not save the creative industries.

The internet means information can be shared more easily than before it. Let's focus on how this can benefit humanity rather than protect antiquated industries.

[image from]

The digital farm

In trying to work out what on earth a digital culture might look like, it seems wise to focus well away from social media, twotter and Google Valley.

So what might a farm look like in the digital age? Well after tea and chat with @FarmArtist, I got inspired about the idea of a culturally digital farm. Given previous thoughts, I'd expect a digital farm to be very collaborative, distributed in structure, somehow involve aggregation and probably not have very high walls.

And then a whole bunch of things fell together. I volunteer with Food Up Front, a south London urban food growing network. It works for local food growing much like Facebook does for socialising. I recently went to London Yields, an exhibition on the possible future of urban agriculture. Lots of concept buildings, hydroponics and roof gardens. @FarmArtist told me about Fordhall organic farm whose tenants were under threat from Muller Dairy. 8000 people collaborated to purchase the land and extend a 100 year lease to the tenants.

So if a definition of the farm is a 'workplace consisting of farm buildings and cultivated land as a unit' then what does digital culture bring to that concept? How could a farm be digital? Well it's probably just the unit that has changed. It used to be in one space. But a digital farm would likely be distributed over a wider area, farmed or funded by many and then the produce aggregated together somehow. And that reminds of that brilliant SF project, MyFarm, the 'decentralized urban farm' which sells boxes of vegetables grown in back gardens. And then in today's Springwise email there's Veggie Trader, an online marketplace for homegrown surplus food. Wonderful.