Tasmanian Times

Milton: The Order is hostile to truth. First, as tending to efface knowledge already gained. The waters of truth have been likened to a fountain; but they stagnate now into a muddy pool of conformity and tradition. The man of business, chiefly anxious to keep up appearances, and the man of pleasure, anxious to be saved trouble, will give up the attempt to think in religion and will become the merest formulists … Men with good conscience and a real love of truth ought to wish for open discussion.

WHEN the Berlin wall came down in November 1989, a new era of democracy was inaugurated. In the 1940s the world had fewer than ten democratic countries — Australia was one of them. Now a majority of countries are, to some degree, democratic.

Today we live in a computer IT age where the terms ‘hardware’ and ‘software’ are applied to these useful tools and the know-how to use them properly. Just as an independent judiciary and an independent central bank can be regarded as hardware, judges and central bankers are the software functionaries.

Yes, we need democratic laws and institutions that allow for universal suffrage (hardware), but we also need a ‘demos’ that doesn’t feel intimidated into voting one way or the other (software).

Equally we need the machinery of government to debate and create new laws (hardware), and you need elected members uncompromised by corruption and cronyism that can taint its workings (software).

A legal scholar Larry Lessig, best known for his work on intellectual property wrote: “Ninety percent of the challenge is to build a culture that respects the rules and that practices that respect. A document does not build a culture.”

What Larry is referring to is the hardware of a single law or a constitution is not enough; you need the culture — the software — also.

One of the critical tools for a civilised society to use is public discourse or dialogue and we believe this valuable tool is being mistreated and misused.

Hostile to the Truth

This is nothing new here, as Milton said three centuries ago:

“The Order is hostile to truth. First, as tending to efface knowledge already gained. The waters of truth have been likened to a fountain; but they stagnate now into a muddy pool of conformity and tradition. The man of business, chiefly anxious to keep up appearances, and the man of pleasure, anxious to be saved trouble, will give up the attempt to think in religion and will become the merest formulists … Men with good conscience and a real love of truth ought to wish for open discussion.

Secondly — the Order is hostile to truth as preventing any addition to knowledge. Truth was once incarnate on earth; but it has been hewn in pieces by Falsewood, and the pieces have been cast to the four winds, and as Isis sought for the limbs of Osiris, slain and mangled by Typhon, so the friends of Truth are even now looking for the scattered members. Do not be hinderers of the search.”

The impulse to conceal, to limit media did not vanish in the 17th century. It is ever present today.

Reading and writing are two universal hardware tools that we take for granted. Raymond Williams in his book em>Television, recalls that when the industrial revolution required the reorganisation of education, “the ruling class decided to teach working people to read but not to write. It was argued that if they could read they could understand new kinds of instructions, and moreover, they could read the Bible for more improvement. They did not need writing, however, since they would have no orders or instructions or lessons to communicate.”

But something unexpected happened. There was no way to teach a man to read the Bible which did not also enable him to read the radical press. A controlled intention became an uncontrolled effect. This reveals the spontaneous thing about “software” — knowing how to use a new tool. The effects are inevitably uncontrolled.

This brings us to our new communication tool — weblogs or blogs. Tasmanian Times believes our collective challenge is to use this tool wisely and well. Worldwide weblog sites began to emerge on the late 1990s; there were only a few thousand weblogs by the turn of the millennium. Technorati, which among other things, tracks weblogs, estimates there are now 8,500,000 weblogs worldwide!

Weblogs are at the centre of the new media democratisation, allowing users to be both readers and writers. However, like conventional media — mainstream press, electronic — it too can be corrupted or tainted.

Magically paradoxical

Weblog journalism can challenge the status quo approach to media and can equally be challenging to take part in.

In a weblog piece entitled PressThink Jas Rosen discussed the ten aspects things about weblog journalism that contrasts it radically from mainstream media; they are magically paradoxical:

• The weblog comes out of the “gift economy” whereas most of today’s journalism comes out of the “market economy”.

• Journalism has become the domain of professionals, and amateurs are sometimes welcome into it; whereas the weblog is the domain of amateurs and professionals are the ones being welcomed to it.

• In journalism since the mid-19th century, barriers to entry have been high. With the weblob, barriers to entry are low: a computer, an internet connection and a simple software program get you there.

• In the weblog world every reader is actually a writer, writing not so much for ‘the reader’ but for other writers.

• In journalism the regular way, we imagine the public record accumulating — becoming longer. In journalism the weblog way, we imagine the public record ‘tightening’ — becoming stronger, as links produce more links.

• A weblog can ‘work’ — it can be sustainable, meaningful, worth doing — if it reaches 50 or 100 people. In journalism the traditional way, such a small response would seem as a failure, but in the weblog way the intensity of the small response can spell success.

• A weblog is like a column in a newspaper, sort of, but whereas a column written by 12 people makes little sense and wouldn’t work, a blog written by 12 people makes perfect sense and does work.

• In journalism before the weblog, the story went to an editor and the editor represented the likely reader. With a weblog, the story goes directly to the actual readers, and the readers represent an editor.

• In journalism classically understood, information flows from the press to the public. In the weblog world, information flows from the public to the press.

• Journalism traditionally assumes that democracy is what we have, information is what we seek; whereas in the weblog world, information is what we have — it is all around us — and democracy is what we seek.

Another perspective is provided by the journalist and blogger, Jeff Jarvis, who listed the implicit code of ethics that he saw developing in online blogging:

• The ethic of transparency: We believe that our public deserves to know about us and our perspective to better judge what we say.

• The ethic of conversation: We do not believe in one-sided lectures. We believe conversation leads to better understanding.

• The ethic of the link: We believe one of our key jobs is to link our public to the other voices and to source material so they may judge themselves.

• The ethic of correction: We believe it is vital to correct errors quickly and openly.

• The ethic of immediacy: We believe that the fast spread of information will yield better information.

And, implicit in Point 2 is the aspect Tasmanian Times believes should be highlighted; the ethic of respect for other viewpoints; thus Tasmanian Times believes there should be a limit on abusive comments, particularly anonymous abusive put-downs.

Paradoxes of the weblog and more are coming; those moments of rupture in the life and times of a free press, when a story leaves off, becomes untouchable or totally fails, and we have to begin it again in order to keep it going.

It is at these moments. Each one a little adventure in liberty, that we should be ready with our best ideas — about news, journalism, political communication, authorship, nation, civil society, citizenship and the purpose of having a free press — for these may be necessary. Watch out: they may also spring to life.

References:
Jason Rosen (2005) Each Nation its Own Press: The Alfred Deakin Innovation Lectures The Miegunyah Press, Melbourne.
Lance Knobel (2005) Nullius in verba — Navigating through the new media democracy: The Alfred Deakin Innovation Lectures The Miegunyah Press, Melbourne.