Keen Questions

1. How does Keen define Democratized media, and what are his main issues with this trend? use examples from the web in the form of links. Include this idea of "disintermediation".
According to Andrew Keen, author of “How Today’s Internet Is Killing Our Culture” democratized media are websites with user’s creating the content. Unlike in the past where professionals accounted for the majority of the media we consume, the internet is opening up a world of opportunities to amateurs. This presents a problem according to Keen; these amateurs do not have the formal training necessary to proliferate trusted news. Trust is a large focus of Keen, mainly the lack of it democratized media offers. Websites allow anyone to submit and edit content, the result of which is less credible and reliable than the work of professionals. Without fact checkers and editors people can post stories of pure fabrication or bias.
The term “disintermediation” is the lack of a gatekeeper party between website hosts and content submitters. There is no one around to check on the accuracy of the submitted material. Without fact checkers Keen argues that the whole medium is discredited and nothing more than amateur journalism. Without traditional pathways disintermediation is crossing the roles of content submitter, webmaster, and reader. One person can play multiple roles creating a conflict of interests that threatens to discredit the entire medium.
2. Compare and Contrast Keens take on Social Media with Douglas Rushkoff's. What are these differences in opinion? Which one speaks to you and your own experiences and why? You may include the ideas of such utopian technophiles as Larry Lessig, Chris anderson, and Jimmy Wales (who are these guys!?)

In the ever changing world of technology standing still is not an option. The world is changing and people's viewpoints cannot afford to stall. One side of the spectrum argues that technology will help us make the next evolutionary step towards becoming the hyperbeing while others argue that this technology will eventually be our downfall. Douglas Rushkoff belongs in the first group of people, although he is cautious of the abuse of technology he is overall in favor. In his opinion the changes made in communication have made a positive change on our lives. At first glance it would appear he is right, we now have the ability to communicate with people is distant countries as easily as someone down the block.
On the other hand, there are people who argue that this technology will eventually prove negative. Andrew Keen is among those people. He views the change in communication and the rise of democratized media as a bad thing. He argues that we are becoming dependent on this technology and the further on we go the more this addiction will grow. My opinion agrees with Keen's, I too believe that the continual dominance of technology will have overall negative effects on people. More and more of my generation are wasting time on Facebook rather than spending time face to face. As Facebook becomes an even more critical aspect of our society I can only see the problem spreading.