Why Should We Care?

Brian Conley (right) with Jeff Jarvis at the
2006 Video on the Net conference in Boston.
Brian Conley, creator of the videoblog Alive in Baghdad and a tireless campaigner for human rights, was reportedly detained in China after filming (and webcasting) a street protest for Free Tibet.

This comes just days after internationally famed artist James Powderly was arrested and detained for a similar display of pro-Tibet dissent during the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games.

As of this blog post, I don't believe either man has been heard from since his detention.

And yet, if you read the comments from either link above, you'll notice that the majority of the commenters make the same case: these guys are either too dumb to realize they'd be jailed for protesting in China, or they simply got what they deserved.

Funny, I always thought the ideals of the West were built on the concept of freedom of speech and sticking up for the oppressed.

So, in a cultural climate of zero support... why bother?

And, more importantly, why should we care?

Technology Trumps Humanity Every Time

The world has always had its fair share of corruption, violence, war, famine, human rights atrocities and general self-destruction. But now, thanks to the internet, news of these disasters and tragedies can travel around the globe instantaneously.

Instead of making us all give a damn, however, this overwhelming surge of negative news is simply making us all more jaded.

Now, instead of caring about how one person (or government) is destroying the lives of innocents, we lament that this negativity is ruining our day. Harshing our mellow. Making us aware that the world is not always a bright, shiny (and stark white) iPhone commercial.

We resent that.

We're now so much more aware of just how shitty a place the world can be, I think we're all subconsciously tuning out anything that doesn't provide us with an escape from that reality.

We also have to earn so much more money during this troubled economy just to keep up with our comfortable level of consumption, we don't have the time, energy or resources to care all that much about anything that isn't adding to our coffers or providing us with relief and amusement.

And, even if we did develop the urge to care about something, we still have to cultivate the strength and awareness to take action -- and to know HOW to take action. That requires research, which is time intensive, and often requires sacrifice -- none of which really fits into our modern schedule.

This explains the proliferation of impassioned blogs and tweets about every meaningless technological ripple under the sun -- every new iPhone model, WordPress plugin, or beta test invitation -- and the comparably deafening silence whenever the subject changes to sociological issues. (Except politics. Every LOVES to let the world know what they believe, even if that belief doesn't necessarily translate into action.)

So where do we go from here?

Web 3.0 as Lightning Rod or Escape Clause

As the web gets more intelligent (both the services and their users), we have a choice: we can use this worldwide connectivity and instantaneous data transfer to accomplish more progress faster than any other generation has previously...

... or we can use it to distract ourselves from the horrors of reality, which seem to be ever-growing in number and degree.

I don't blame people for not caring. I don't even blame them for thinking that we should string up the people who DO care. After all, the people who care make the rest of us look bad.

When we hear about the actions taken by people who care, we run the risk of realizing that we probably could have done something more productive with our day than whatever it was we actually did do -- populating databases, animating spinning logos or selling goods to be purchased solely with discretionary income.

If only everyone would just settle down and stop caring, we could all get on with our lives.

And yet...

... would we need to distract ourselves from the terrors of the world if there weren't quite so many?

And would there be so many if those of us who did care actually... took action?

Why Social Media Doesn't Matter (Yet)

I produce social media, both for fun (Something to Be Desired) and for a living. And I can say, even as one of the medium's biggest supporters, that it simply doesn't matter.

Yet.

Why? Because we, with rare exception, are not producing media that matters.

Yet.

Here's the paradox: given the financial, creative and time constraints imposed upon aspiring social media creators, most people do exactly what they've been told since their first writing lesson: write what you know.

This results in a rich tapestry of user-generated media about quirky content that small groups are passionate about. And yet, despite even the larger success stories, very few people are creating media that appeals to an audience outside the early-adopter tech / niche / geek fishbowl.

Why? Three reasons.

1. Who's Watching Me?

The largest audience for this kind of content IS the affluent, tech-obsessed population. This tends to exclude large segments of the populace by association. (Thus, why produce media for an audience that isn't there?)

2. Great Expectations

To produce something akin to "mainstream" media -- whether comedy, drama, news, education, etc. -- forces the potential audience to compare that independently-produced media with the slick, corporate-funded media presented to them every day, across multiple distribution platforms, for free.

This is not a comparison in which the average, pop culture-beholden consumer will find in favor of the indie, so why invest resources in attracting their attention in the first place?

Thus, based solely upon the two initial premises, the aspiring social media creator is faced with a choice: invest time and effort in becoming large WITHIN the fishbowl, and hope that niche appeal eventually translates to a scalable opportunity within the traditional corporate media structure...

... or, attempt to create something "populist" from the get-go, knowing that the odds of acceptance are diminished on both sides (from the culture AND the counter-culture, each of whom will see the creator as an half-compliant outsider).

3. No One (Including the Creators) Actually Cares

The other reason social media doesn't matter (yet) is because social media creators, with rare exception, fail to use the democratic potential of this medium to engage in MEANINGFUL conversation or incite ACTUAL change.

Take Alive in Baghdad. Everyone who's familiar with the series, who's watched a few episodes, or who knows creator Brian Conley personally, realizes that AiB is one of the landmark creations in social media's still-nascent history.

The premise of the series -- actual stories of Iraqi citizens, filmed by Iraqis and translated for the American (and world) public -- appeals directly to the "renegade" sensibilities of the social media culture. We all inherently recognize the risks Brian is taking and the potential for change that AiB provides. This makes Brian's tale the easiest to tell, the one that's most inspiring, and the comparison that's hardest to live up to.

It's also, apparently, almost impossible to sustain.

Why?

Because the social media audience (like the mainstream audience) doesn't want to involve itself in stories outside its own fishbowl. It doesn't want to tumble down the rabbit hole of world politics, or theology, or sociology. It doesn't want to risk taking actions that may be inconvenient or uncomfortable.

Meanwhile, if you post a Twitter about the new iPods, or mention an upcoming tech conference, or ask what people's favorite fonts are, you'll be overwhelmed with replies.

The fishbowl, it seems, is safe.

Will It Blend?

How do you reconcile:

* a medium built upon democratization,
* a culture steeped in consumerism, and
* a community comprised primarily of intelligent, independent and strongly opinionated -- yet ultimately insular, self-obsessed and apathetic -- individuals

with the possibility for this emerging medium to become relevant (and even catalytic) beyond its own borders?

I think those of us who've moved beyond the simple creation of social media and taken the time to foster its community need to ask ourselves a few questions:

* Why am I doing this?

* What constitutes "success" for me?

* What's IMPORTANT to me?

I fully expect that, for 90% of the social media population, the color choices among the new iPod Nanos ARE what's important to them. That's not their fault -- the fishbowl is a welcoming place, and their voices ring much louder within its walls than they would outside.

But, for the other 10% who can somehow sense that social media is capable of more than just generating record-setting Halo 3 sales numbers...

... or driving up demand for the iPhone...

... or defending the career of Britney Spears...

... surely there must be something more we can do?