“The Victorian Internet” by Tom Standage, business editor at the Economist, offers a concise history of the rise and fall of the telegraph. The well-written history takes into account the parallels that can be drawn between the telegraph and the Internet, as well as the adoption cycle of new technology. Standage intertwines factual statistics with humorous biographical information about the telegraph’s inventors and users. The book offers a fun and informative read.

In just 213 pages, Standage covers the life of the telegraph. The brief yet thorough history begins with the tale of Parisian monks who tinkered with electric shock in 1746. The author then follows the development of the telegraph through its demise at the turn of the twentieth century when the telephone emerged as its successor.

Parallels between the telegraph and Internet are made apparent throughout the work. The similarities provide a useful framework with which readers can evaluate modern advancements in communication technology. For example, the telegraph was viewed as a threat to the news industry, just as the Internet is viewed today: “The telegraph could deliver news almost instantly…many assumed that the telegraph would actually put newspapers out of business” (p. 149). And the question was raised of “Who ought to be doing the reporting?” (p. 150), just as there is question as to who should be reporting in today’s Internet age. Additional similarities include the introduction of information overload, questions of government control, privacy, and new-age crime. “As fast as the rules were changed [by the ITU], new codes were devised [by the public] to get around them” (p. 118). Standage directly addresses the similarities in the final chapter: “More striking still are the parallels between the social impact of the telegraph and that of the Internet. Public reaction to the new technologies was, in both cases, a confused mixture of hype and skepticism. Just as many Victorians believed the telegraph would eliminate misunderstanding between nations and usher in a new era of world peace, an avalanche of media coverage has lauded the Internet as a powerful new medium that will transform and improve our lives” (p. 207).

The consumer adoption cycle for newly introduced technology is an overarching message of the book. The cycle is relevant to today’s readers, as it can be applied to modern emerging technologies. Standage relays that successful technologies may be met with doubt when first introduced and not widely adopted until years later. And, inevitably, new technology is at the mercy of newer technological advancements. The cycle is best summarized on page 188: “The triumph of the telegraph, despite the initial bewilderment and skepticism that greeted it, had demonstrated the futility of resisting the inevitable; further technological advances were shortly to have a devastating impact on the telegraph and the community that had sprung up around it.” Similarly, the Internet’s roots superseded its widespread adoption by decades; it was not until recently that it has become a must-have tool for business operations. And, as the cycle holds, it too will be replaced with improved technology some day.

Standage’s humorous recounts of human interaction add an engaging human interest angle to his book. He includes anecdotes ranging from romances to foibles to stereotypical behaviors of rivalrous inventors and ever-popular jabs at the French. He describes how Senator Oliver Smith of Indiana thought perhaps Samuel F. B. Morse was “deranged” for having an idea such as the telegraph (p. 47). Standage also shares the story of a woman who wed her beaux via telegraph despite her father’s insistence that she marry the suitor whom he had selected for her (p. 128). The humorous relations between inventors are carried throughout the book. Even into their old age, competition ensued: “Wheatstone refused the offer of the Albert Medal from the Royal Society of Arts, because it was also offered to Cooke” (p. 203).

In conclusion, “The Victorian Internet” offers a valuable examination of the rise and fall of the telegraph. The entertaining history is worth reading and provides an insightful context for modern communications technology to be evaluated.

Source:
Standage, Tom. (1998). The Victorian Internet. New York: Walker and Company.

In today’s digital age of inexpensive and accessible media production and distribution means, it is clear that “We’re All Journalists Now.”

The book of this title by Scott Gant explores the current era’s transition in journalism and the laws associated with the changing times. Gant’s book examines today’s definition of “journalist” and to whom journalistic rights ought to be afforded. There are many well done elements of his book, ranging from its historical accounts, to modern day examples, to its strong central message and arguments. This is an excellent book for a classroom discussion, as its message has many points that can be debated. While the author’s position is at times questionable, this is a book that should be read. “We’re All Journalists Now” is a worthwhile, thought-provoking work.

The benefits of this book are ample. Gant stays on-message well and his main points are consistently supported throughout the book: First, that “press” rights should be granted based upon the act of journalism rather than a media-organization affiliation (p. 86); second, that “the legal framework for allocating press rights and privileges is not keeping up with the pace of change”(p. 136). In addition, Gant does well to provide a full-circle historical account of the press – from the independent penny papers prepared by the people (p. 15), to corporate-driven media conglomerates (p. 20), to citizen created blogs (p.24). He investigates the ways in which “journalism is returning to its status as an activity rather than a profession” (p. 136).

Credit should also be given to Gant for his use of legal examples to highlight his message that there should be a consistent, modern system of protection for journalists. His examples range from the precedent-setting Branzburg v. Hayes case of 1972 which “gave rise to more questions than it answered” (p. 64), to possible modern-day “shield law legislation in the 110^th Congress” (p. 155).

Gant shines with a well-structured argument on page 84. He offers an evaluation of licensing the press, wherein he provides the pros and cons given by Justices and offers subsidiary information based on the addition of technological developments. Due to the fact that anyone can engage in journalism in today’s age, Gant concludes that: “If the Court reexamines the nature of press freedom, what is crucial, is that it recognize that any special ‘press’ rights conferred by the First Amendment must be based on activity, not status” (p. 86). His fully-formed arguments are a pleasure to read, as they evaluate multiple sides of the issue.

Nonetheless, while Gant’s arguments and examples are clear, there is room for debate in some of his theories. Such room for debate can be seen as a pro or a con to the book:  A pro in that it presents opportunities for critical thought and evaluation, and a con because a non-critical reader may simply read it and agree with his questionable messages. From the perspective of a reviewer, this is a pro. There are many wonderful opportunities to engage in questioning the author. This is an excellent book for which a critical essay could be written; some readers may find themselves siding with Gant’s adversaries. Following are two examples of Gant’s opinions that welcome debate:

First, Gant cites that there is “an artificial distinction between professional journalists and everyone else” (p. 34) and sees a “need for reevaluation at all levels of government of the circumstances in which special benefits are extended to those we deem journalists, and denied to everyone else” (p. 90). One could argue that there will always be times in which certain rules apply to particular entities and not to others. If one views the government as a business, it is the norm that certain players will be granted privileges over others. Through such a lens, it makes sense that perks would be granted to someone serving the best-interests of the company. A hotel hoping for a great editorial review will offer a complimentary stay with all the bells and whistles for someone who writes for a popular travel publication; however, that same hotel may not offer any deals to someone who claims to be a journalist but has an unknown blog and no resume. It is natural for the government to act in its best interest, as any business would. Nonetheless, Gant finds it “troubling” that “only those associated with traditional news organizations are legitimate, and entitled to those special privileges” (p. 116). He also describes these selective preferences as “unfair” (p. 126). This, again, seems to be an open line for criticism using the old adage that “life’s not fair.” Gant also takes issue with the fact that a “caste system” has evolved in journalism (p. 136). To this, one could argue that the world is comprised of systems of haves and have-nots. Despite working in the same industry, employees are not granted the same luxuries as their company’s CEO. Similarly, within universities, graduate and undergraduate students are not granted admittance into the same honor societies.

As a second example, Gant calls it “unfortunate” that the White House is considering ways to “tighten up the press credentialing process” (p. 107). In contrast, it could be debated that a tightening of press credentials is not a bad idea in this age wherein everyone is a journalist. Gant believes that the act of journalism is the sole requirement that should be considered for citizen journalists to be on the same playing field as learned professional journalists. However, Gant briefly admits in his conclusion that “as for the ‘new media,’ much of it is junk” (p. 200). This assessment provides ammunition for a critical reader to rightly ask: “Should someone who produces junk really be allowed behind the scenes of the White House or granted such special privileges? Should they be granted trustworthy rights purely because they engage in the act of journalism?” Albeit, Gant believes an “over-extension of preferences is far preferable to denying press privileges” (p. 179).

In conclusion, “We’re All Journalists Now” is a thought provoking work and offers an excellent foundation for debate or classroom discussions. It is a worthwhile read for those looking to gain perspective on the transitioning media in today’s digital age. Gant provides a consistent argument while offering insightful background information on the media and government policies relating to journalism. This book is best read, and most enjoyable, when read with a critical eye.

How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom is an apt subheading for The Wealth of Networks by Yochai Benkler. The book encompasses topics as broad as the name suggests. 

The five-hundred page book provides a sweeping take on networks, covering nearly everything from the history of radio to the future of information law and policy. The dense Introduction may take readers several days to wade through, but offers the core messages of the book, compacted into twenty-eight pages. After breaking further into the book, the weight is lifted as the author’s ideas are presented more freely, with space dedicated to supplementary explanations and examples.

The Wealth of Networks is a book worth reading and provides a respectable overview of many topics, with an array of perspectives to consider. Benkler presents his viewpoints nicely. A few points of contention for the reader can be seen in occasionally repetitious or presumptuous statements that break the flow of reading. In addition, the stand-alone style of each chapter is suggestive of a lesson plan for teachers.

To his credit, Benkler does well to ensure that his stance on each issue is quite clear; it is evident that he is a liberal proponent of freedoms and rights: “Freedom—the freedom to speak, but also to be free from manipulation and to be cognizant of many and diverse options—inheres in this (networked environment) radically greater diversity of information, knowledge, and culture through which to understand the world and imagine how one could be” (p. 168). “The increasing feasibility of nonmarket, nonproprietary production of information, knowledge, and culture, and of communications and computation capacity holds the promise of increasing the degree of autonomy for individuals in the networked information economy” (p. 174).

Despite pushing the agenda of his own political lens, Benkler does a fair job of offering both sides of his arguments. He does not just force his ideas on his reader, but rather gives an analysis of opposing views in order to prove why he believes his points ought to prevail. For example, on page 233, Benkler clearly outlines the five basic critiques about the Internet as a tool for democratization, and proceeds on page 237 with: “The remainder of this chapter is devoted to responding to these critiques, providing a defense of the claim that the Internet can contribute to a more attractive liberal public sphere.” On page 271 he responds with a diplomatic answer to the critiques: “The first generation of statements that the Internet democratizes was correct but imprecise.” He continues with: “The network allows all citizens to change their relationship to the public sphere. They no longer need be consumers and passive spectators. They can become creators and primary subjects. It is in this sense that the Internet democratizes.”(p. 272).

With ideas repeated throughout the book, each chapter could stand alone – a benefit to an instructor looking to teach just one portion of the book. However, from a leisure reader’s perspective, such redundancies can interrupt the flow of reading. For example, Chapter 6, page 199, states “The Sinclair Broadcast Group is one of the largest owners of television broadcast stations in the United States” and Chapter 7, page 220, states “Sinclair, which owns major television stations…” Such repetitions may cause readers to feel disoriented and pause to determine if they are accidentally re-reading a chapter, because the ideas were recently addressed and are still top-of-mind. This repetitive manner makes the chapters ideal for teachers who may want to teach just one section; otherwise, the repetition disrupts the flow of the book.

Another disruption to the flow of reading is Benkler’s occasional use of broad or all-assuming statements. Despite his qualitative examples, Benkler sometimes uses statements that seem unfounded, or too general to be stated in the factual manner he uses. Benkler’s “universals” may cause a reader to pause in order to consider the validity of such statements, and question what research or qualifications led Benkler to make such assertions. The following three sentences offer examples.

These definitive statements about “human beings everywhere,” the instigators of personal resentment and self-esteem, and conditions that “make us all more sophisticated” are presumptuous and unsupported. The accumulation of such unfounded “facts” may cause readers to pause, thereby breaking the flow of reading.

In conclusion, despite the foregoing shortcomings of some statements and structure, The Wealth of Networks is a work worth reading. Benkler offers insights into a broad range of topics and makes his points by presenting opposing views, thus providing readers with both sides of the issue at hand. I would recommend this book, but forewarn readers that it can be a lengthy read at times.

The Long Tail. Chris Anderson. Hyperion, 2006. 238 pp.

The digital age has thrown a curve ball at traditional economic theory. Disrupting the institutionalized notion that economics is about choice under scarcity, the Internet has introduced economists to a world of abundance.

Chris Anderson’s book The Long Tail examines the non-traditional markets that emerge when people are faced with abundance and infinite selection. This model allows the public to deviate from the accepted norm of being fed “hits” that are corporately designed for mass-appeal. Anderson’s Long Tail theory proves that by opening the door for consumers to access niche choices and tools of creation, the Internet has unveiled a means of “turning unprofitable customers, products, and markets into profitable ones” (p. 11). The Long Tail refers to the market share that is made attainable by the Internet’s introduction of “abundant shelf space, abundant distribution, and abundant choice” (p. 143).

In The Long Tail, Anderson effectively presents engaging ideas that are muted only by the book’s sometimes-scattered structure. Anderson uses real-world examples to make his points, leads readers to evaluate their own consumer habits, and upholds the context that the Long Tail is part of a bigger picture. At times Anderson is redundant, and the book lacks the guidance of a defined genre, but compared to The Long Tail’s strong overall message, the points of contention are minimal.

Using real-world examples, Anderson effectively teaches readers how the digital age is empowering formerly complaisant consumers to control what is popular. Anderson gives examples of musicians who made it big without record label support and were able to “record and distribute their music themselves and keep their creative independence” (p. 106) and actors who developed enormous fan bases and reached stardom by posting their skits online. By citing such examples, Anderson illustrates to readers that aspiring artists no longer need to wait for a big break from entertainment industry executives; “technology has shifted the balance of power from label to band” (p. 106). Anderson also uses a real-world example to show readers that when a company broadens its selection of items it will learn from the customer what is popular: “Until KitchenAid had an online channel that allowed customers to pick from its full range of products, it had no way of knowing that there was latent consumer demand [for orange mixers] that it hadn’t previously tapped” (p. 205).

The author’s real-world proof that consumers can influence industries leads readers to evaluate their own position in corporate-to-consumer relationships. The Long Tail model causes readers to think twice about supporting broad-appeal-based businesses that offer limited selections. Readers may ask: Why should I settle for mainstream when I can get just what I want elsewhere? Both consumers and producers can leverage the Long Tail of niche markets to their own advantage. Anderson notes that while abundance of selection grants consumers the power of choice, businesses are reaping the revenue benefits of the Tail: “the numbers are so large that you can lop off a large chunk (the hits) and it’s still a huge market” (p. 215).

Anderson does a good job of reminding the reader of the context from which the Long Tail should be viewed; it is one splice of a larger market. He appropriately notes that while there is a significant subculture market to be captured in the Long Tail, the head of hits should not be disregarded. It is hard to side with writers such as Anita Elberse of the Harvard Business Review who seem to misconstrue the Long Tail concept as promoting tail-only business; Anderson explicitly states that “successful Long Tail aggregators need to have both hits and niches” (p. 148). He cites the importance of both ends, using Google as an example: “most of its revenues come from the head of the curve, [but] most of its customers are somewhere in the tail, which suggests that this is where much of its growth will come in the future” (p. 215).

While the educational and thought-provoking merits of The Long Tail are significant, Anderson nonetheless introduces two challenges to his readers. The first challenge lies in the mid-section of the book, wherein Anderson is unnecessarily redundant and risks losing the reader’s attention. Page 146 would make an excellent last page, as it nicely summarizes and connects what has been read. Although there is some good content interspersed in the redundancy, Chapter 9 (page 147) would make a nice start for The Long Tail: Part Two, as it restates what was in Part I. Page 155 revisits big box retailers, page 164 tells the reader again that there are limitations in airwaves, and goes on to recount what makes a hit. Ironically, in his WIRED Magazine article, “Free! Why $0.00 is the Future of Business,” Anderson states that in a world of abundance attention is the new scarcity to be vied for. A more concise, well-organized edition of the book would be more apt to engage the scarcity of attention.

The second challenge is that the book lacks a genre. Anderson admits “I tremble to think where the Dewey Decimal System will place the book you’re reading now. Technology? Economics? Business? Culture? None of them are quite right by themselves” (p. 161). For the reader, not knowing what The Long Tail was written for hinders enjoyment and slows the reading process. It is challenging to decipher if the book is meant to be read as a textbook from which statistics ought to be memorized, or as a breezy read that offers ideas that will be fun to share at cocktail parties. Anderson finds single-genre classifications to be limiting, since “one thing can be many different things to many different people” (p. 161). However, he overlooks that a genre can be of more use than just determining where to physically or digitally store/categorize the book. Genres can also provide readers a useful context from which to read. The burden of figuring out the genre of The Long Tail is a hurdle for the reader. 

As Professor Kathy Gill of the University of Washington notes, this is the “Wild West” of the digital age. In this Wild West, Anderson pulls together the elements and implications of a previously unattainable Long Tail market to bring meaning to this burgeoning area that is still being defined. Despite a few points of contention, The Long Tail does an excellent job of introducing and addressing today’s changing economy and leads readers to evaluate the economic role they play.