Talk:Andrew Keen/Archive 1

Archive 1

colbert

just made an idiot out of himself on colbert (thursday, august 16) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.201.100.166 (talk) 03:57, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

• I just saw that. What a douche. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.46.189 (talk) 03:59, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
• 300th episode too...the douchebag came off as lacking knowledge as well as class. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.121.138.53 (talk) 04:02, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow, just discovered this article after watching Mr. Keen on the The Colbert Report. He came across as very cold and bitter, bitter that the internet is a democratic venue where the ordinary citizen can exercise his or her right to free speech. Can someone please write a criticism section for this elitist (insert insult here). Ohh and he also said he "loathes" Wikipedia. --Tocino 17 August 2007, 05:03 (UTC)

I just saw that myself...didn't exactly do such a great job making his case, did he? Just sat there sneering. You know, this is one of those things that really ticks me off, the perception that because most of us Wikipedians are not "certified Experts," then we are necessarily stupid and can't synthesize information from secondary sources. I second the creation of a "criticism" section, if for no better reason, then because I'm annoyed at him. K. Lásztocska 04:08, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

He was such a complete douche that Colbert actually cut the interview short. I couldn't believe when Colbert, attempting to set up a "liberal ivory tower" joke, asked him "Doesn't that make you an elitist?" and he actually replied, deadpan, "What's wrong with that?" I have never wanted so much to stab somebody in the eye before. Gregly 19:51, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Gregly: I know! What a douchebag! I loved it when he said "even the Nazis didn't put artists out of work". Someone's never heard of Degenerate art. PerryPlanet 20:45, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

why do you people sneer at trained certified experts who dedicate their lives to whatever subject, getting years of education and experience. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.10.105.239 (talk) 18:49, August 22, 2007 (UTC)

I just saw the interview. This man comes off as quite bitter and very unknowledgeable about what the internet is and is capable of. He comes across to me as the kind of guy who thinks only rich people should appreciate art, and that the printing press is dangerous because it'll allow ordinary people to read the Bible without having a priest to interpret it for them. --70.77.37.70 02:30, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Andrew Keen knows more about the internet than you. Don't forget that. --69.17.164.159 05:05, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

• Can you prove that? 67.36.191.238 05:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

69.17.164.159 is being sarcastic after what Keen said on the show. That's actually pretty funny. 24.59.148.187 05:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but he didn't actually demostrate it on the Colbert Report. In fact, he didn't really prove anything except that he's an idiot. 67.36.191.238 05:19, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I can't disagree with that. :) 24.59.148.187 06:05, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't see what his point is. Perhaps he has one but couldn't articulate it. He said something about people losing money, about people using blogs to forward the corporate agendas (how does that make them amateur then?). I guess what I wonder is, what is at the end of this argument? He wants to "end" the internet? Restrict access? I doubt he is that dumb. In any case, I guess I'll never know. He had several minutes to sell me his book and he failed. Compare this to Christopher Hitchens who totally sold me his book when he was on Stewart's show. Jackbox1971 07:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I was really interested in figuring out what this guy was all about so I checked out his blog and then I made a point of listening to an extended interview with him on my local NPR station. I feel I have a much better grasp of Keen's critque:

1. He believes that filtered media is superior and preferable to un-filtered (i.e. "anyone can be a journalist") because it is more professional.

2. Professionaism is lost when anyone can write an article on wikipedia because you can't alway trust that the information has been vetted.

3. Authority goes with professionalism. The filter is essentially an agent of authority and when it comes to journalism it is important that the information is well vetted. In his words, you wouldn't want a "citizen-surgeon" or a "citizen-car-mechanic" so why would you want a "citizen-journalist"?

4. He does not hate wikipedia and often finds many of the technical articles well-done. Rather, he feels wikipedia is a symptom of an overall culture-of-the-amateur that is running rampent.

5. Media literacy should be taught in schools. (Whatever that means. If you want to teach critical thinking, call it that!)

Now, I don't agree with his premise, nor do I feel this is the best place to debate his points (hmmm... maybe I'll star a BLOG!) but did want to suggest that there is more to Keen than what came out on Colbert. I would nail him for not being a good guest but I think he does offer a valuable cultural critique. Considering that most books about the internet are gushing love-letters to the technology, it is kind of refreshing to find someone who is will to suggest that things may not be as rosy as some make it out to be. Jackbox1971 01:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

When Colbert accused him of wanting an elite level of people above the lower class "pig farmers" Keen jumped at the idea. What type of person is "keen" on living in feudalism? TophZilla 20:39, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Came across to me as a totally arrogant, self-righteous snob. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.128.30 (talk) 22:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

This guy shows me why the world is becoming stupider and stupider. Because of "experts" who think people are idiots because they won't listen to them and then start forcing children/others thinking that they are right. I love how he trys telling Colbert that the internet told people that there is WMDs in IRAQ, and Colbert replies "No the president told me". Keen should be arrested for fraud, claiming he is an expert when he has no clue what he is talking about.125.70.222.81 01:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

As Mr. Keen is a non expert on technology or media, or even a well respected peer of either field, I find him arrogant, uneducated and lacking a cohesive argument. He sounds like just another person attacking a revolution such as the internet, Web 2.0 ect.. because he fails to understand how and why they've become profitable (not to mention so widely necessary to the survival and expansion of democracy) and threatens existing business models. 74.108.32.83 01:42, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

• I've watched the episode three times now, different sittings, amazed by his total and unabashed arrogance. His posture, his method of questioning, and his complete unwillingness to play along are almost as extraordinary as Colbert's ability to smack him down every time he set up a line of questioning. "Do you believe there were weapons of mass destruction? Where did you learn that?" I'm sorry, British people, but you're no longer allowed to look down your nose at me because I'm the arrogant American. Now, looking down on me because I'm from New Jersey, that's still kosher. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.133.229.226 (talk) 04:07:45, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

he makes a brilliant argument, colbert is not the proper format for his polemic though four minutes was not nearly enough time. you have no idea if i am andrew keen himself promoting his own book theres no accountability on this anarchistic mob rule web 2.0 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.10.105.239 (talk) 05:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

• I see you've taken to editing Wikipedia, Mr. Keen. I understand you loathe this medium- does that mean it's okay to aggrandize yourself in it, or what? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.133.229.226 (talk) 19:49:10, August 19, 2007 (UTC)
• i'm not really mr keen but he makes good points about trading the dictatorship of experts with years of training and experience and accountability with the dictatorship of an idiotic mob. the idea truth by consensus of a mob all posessing their own ideas of truth, going into their own sheltered communities where they dont need to be exposed to other ideas. whereas the newspaper was a common jumping off point for everyone. and even now the newspaper can be held accountable, there is no one to be held accountable here —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.10.105.239 (talk) 22:32:09, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

2"even the Nazis didn't put artists out of work" (see above): This may very well be the most interesting quote from the segment, yet the article only articulates that he loathes Wikipedia, something which may have been left unexplained in the show but otherwise is in line with what Andrew Keen has said before, e.g. in his book, and thus not very interesting. Shinobu 23:53, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

As stated at the top of the discussion page, this is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject. Since this section does not appear to be used to discuss improvements to the Andrew Keen article, I'm archiving the section. I'd like to remind participants who disagree with the opinions of the article's subject to express their dissent in a civil manner if it is relevant to improvement of the article. If it's not relevant to improvement of the article, keep it to yourselves or find a more appropriate forum. Also, sign your posts. Cheers. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:25, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1