In cruising through the New York Times today I came across a review for a new book by Andrew Keen, The Cult of the Amateur. Although I have not read the book yet - and I still might, just to better understand his perspective – but if the New Times is to be believed, I find Mr. Keen’s proposal very disturbing. It seems that Keen see the web, and especially web 2.0, as a blight on the man’s cultural development; because, it celebrates the “noble amateur” over the expert. 

It seem to me that Keen would have made an excellent ancient aristocrat – oh lets say a duke in the middle ages, or a plantation owner from early American history, or better yet a member of the biblical Sanhedrin. He would do well in any position that relied highly on positional power – power and authority that was granted and not earned. What Mr. Keen fails to realize is that it is the struggle to be heard, the half baked ideas, and the less than perfect credentials of the ideas origin that forces society grow. Experts and authorities need to be pushed to make themselves heard, to explain why their ideas are the right ones, and to question their own assumptions.

While slogging thought my Saturday routine (of grading paper, preparing to teach my undergraduate and graduate courses, banging out the requirements for my own doctoral classes, makings sure I covered my consulting clients requirements, and attempting to keep in touch with my family) I decided to take a few minutes to scan my news feeds (one of my few guilty pleasures). In there was a story from Fast Company (a magazine that I am usually fond of) about obsessive-compulsive productivity . . . I have to admit I started to snicker a bit.