I apologize in advance if you currently have Shirky overload, but I just read a transcript of a speech he gave at the Web 2.0 conference last week and I highly recommend you check it out. It’s short, and it’s good. Trust me.
In a nutshell, Shirky’s speech, called “Gin, Television, and the Social Surplus,” promotes the idea that we as a society are beginning to use our free time to create instead of passively consume information. We are in the early stages of an era where we use our social surplus differently than we did in the “sitcom” era of the 20th century:
“And it’s only now, as we’re waking up from that collective bender, that we’re starting to see the cognitive surplus as an asset rather than as a crisis. We’re seeing things being designed to take advantage of that surplus, to deploy it in ways more engaging than just having a TV in everybody’s basement.”
Example: instead of watching that same episode of Seinfeld again, people are using that time to, say, edit Wikipedia entries.
I was directed to Shirky’s speech through a blog post at Boing Boing, where there’s a long list of skeptics commenting on Shirky’s speech. One commenter complains that only a small group of people actually create the bulk of Wikipedia, while another believes that social media is a fad (ironically, many of these commenters were using their free time to write nearly 400 word responses).
Maybe there’s some truth to this skepticim. Sitcoms aren’t going to die tomorrow, and people aren’t going to collectively ditch old forms of entertainment and spend all of their free time blogging or editing Wikipedia entries. People still want to be entertained. But now that we’ve got the creator “bug” with so many digital tools at our fingertips, we’re seeing more interactivity creep into older and typically passive forms of entertainment (not just TV, books too!). Shirky’s speech reminded me of Jason Robar, the video game consultant who spoke in Hanson’s class last fall. He talked about the increasing popularity of level editing tools in games, as kids (and adults) aren’t satisfied with simply playing games, they want to create their own experiences and share them with others. To some, this type of activity may not be considered any more productive than watching TV but, as Shirky points out, at least their “doing” something.
- Nate
I love the idea of social surplus that Shirky talks about in his presentation. The idea that we are spending some of our free time creating–instead of watching hour after hour of television is great.
After watching his presentation again (I know, maybe I am going overboard on this) I realized I had missed something he said the first time around.
“We’re [people currently experimenting with social media] looking for the mouse. We’re going to look at every place that a reader or a listener or a viewer or a user has been locked out, has been served up passive or a fixed or a canned experience, and ask ourselves, “If we carve out a little bit of the cognitive surplus and deploy it here, could we make a good thing happen?”
Thinking about our discussions in class regarding how to make social media monetarily valuable, I wonder if this is part of the question we should be asking when looking at old systems and technology (and maybe we are already): how can we “unlock” every system so that the user who was unable to participate and engage can do so? This statement doesn’t need to be confined just to the public sector-what about government agencies, non-profits? How can the services that are offered become a collaboration?
I’m glad you posted this Nate — I saw Shirky’s transcript on his blog last week and thought it was an interesting insight. At the very least, it might explain (or be justified by) the teenage demographic’s steering away from prime time TV, to spending more time cruising sites like YouTube in the evenings.
This definitely bears discussion in class.
Benkler posed a similar idea on this. He not only referred to the extra time in our hands, but also the extra ‘bandwith’ and the cheap technology that combined really facilitated the use of or free time to pursue activities just for social motivations (aka just for fun) rather than money.
Adri
No offense to Shirky but I think I’ve found a better use for our (or at least my) Social Surplus.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3nq5l_ujoM
Apparently WSU has always seemed so hip and urbane!
Maury
True. I’ve replaced TV-watching hours with interacting online, sometimes in a way that could be construed as adding to the collective knowledge-base (posting answers to listserve questions, etc.).
And even if I still squander some of my Social Surplus (sounds positively Orwellian, doesn’t it?) by watching TV, I watch online episodes of The Office or Colbert Report. I need to time-shift my entertainment, and watching online on-demand is cheaper & more convenient than TiVo.
So we could argue than even the way we consume passive entertainment is less passive than it used to be.
Another aspect to this is the group of digital multi-taskers – people who are “watching” TV while surfing and posting to forums, social networking sites, etc. My husband does this constantly – back turned to the TV, partially listening, and only turning around to legitimately “watch” when the noise from the TV is “good” enough to pull his interest from the computer.
As TV is funded (mostly) by advertising – wonder how much longer before Madison Avenue realizes they aren’t reaching people like him anymore. I think there’s some grumbling about this, but I’m unconvinced they realize how many folks are only half paying attention – if at all. The TV is even more quickly becoming mere background noise for these digital multi-taskers. My husband’s tuning out the commercial breaks entirely (the ones that he doesn’t TiVo past, that is, but that’s a whole different discussion
.
~Carie
Carie,
It’s possible that something like Microsoft’s MediaRoom could be a hit with multi-taskers or people jonesing for more interactivity. TV’s equivalent of Web 2.0?