Value of content

This article or rather blog post we talked about in class at the beginning of this term, wants to own content? made me think about the transience of content of a text and its value. Especially, some of the responding comments reveal divided opinions if what the writer posts is actually content or not. This content about content exemplifies the dimension how easy “content” can be produced in social media and in the internet in general. An other blogger talks about content and conversation and that it is the conversation between humans what is “king”.

Considering one poem our interviewee for the documentary published on youtube and through which we become attentive to him as an individual, I experienced that the value of a content  grows through conversation, particulary in the virtual world. Because the young guy wrote two poems about the London riots. The first one he created at the very beginning of the riots with badly informed background information, as he told us. He received comments on that which included criticism as well as plaudit. The first time in his life by the way that he was confronted with racist abuses. After participating through news and talking to people what was actually going on in the streets, he wrote a second poem and published it as well on youtube. The feedback comments on this were completely different than on the first one. They mirrored back the depths this new peom provides. It seems that as soon something new appears the former produced content loses its importance or rather has to share attention of audience with even one more peace of text.

The transience of content especially in the internet has its downsides but as well it offers multiple chances to produce and publish a text and express yourself. It seems a virtually typed word has the same value as a printed word. With the difference that the participation of others rates the value of virtually typed content in a completely different way as printed content which is read.



by | June 16, 2012 · 9:51 am

2 responses to “Value of content

  1. Good points – but what about when seemingly transient, immaterial content has major, material consequences. For example, a number of people used social media to post statements about or call outs to take part in the London riots. These apparently inconsequential statements were identifying by the police and led to the individuals responsible for making receiving significant jail terms. Does the context of online content affect its interpretation or impact?

    • Yes, absolutely! Probably I should provide more detail at the point where I mention the “downsides” of the internet. The content in the world wide web seems to be transient concerning the time it catches attention of people who just scroll through content. But people who are affected somehow or are screening the internet in particular for abusive content, especially in relation to the riots, it turns out that nothing will be forgotten in the internet and everything is stored- like the human skin forgets no sunburn even though it doesn’t catch the persons attention anymore when it stops hurting.
      So, the London riots symbolise to this extent quite well that the transience of content has to be questioned from different angles.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s