My eyes have seen the glory

What is more distasteful than a citizen media utopian? It's a citizen media utopian who is also an Arsenal fan (for American readers: Arsenal is a minor soccer team based in a particularly undistinguished part of North London).

That's what Charles Leadbeater, Britain's leading Web 2.0 guru and a former adviser on all things digital to Tony Blair, seems to be. Leadbeater is a big fan of both Arsenal football club and of amateur Internet content -- especially when it is "created" by Arsenal fans. Here's Leadbeater's response to Larry Sanger' recent Edge essay "Who Says We Know: On the New Politics of Knowledge": 

Let me give you a very trivial example. Every morning I scavenge for news about Arsenal football club (soccer to American readers) which has its home round the corner from mine in north London. Ten years ago my sources were confined to the two newspapers I got delivered at home which carried about one report on Arsenal every two days, written by an "expert" football reporter. When the web came along the official Arsenal.com site started to provide lots of useful additional information about upcoming fixtures accompanied by bland match reports and player interviews.

Then five years ago a slightly crazed, sometime drunk, often witty and very passionate Dublin based Arsenal fan started Arseblog which each day provides a daily round up of the news in all the newspapers, on and offline editions, including papers in France and Spain where many Arsenal players come from, as well as linking to all the other—fifteen plus—decent blogs about Arsenal.

In Sanger's nightmare scenario Arseblog would became a monopoly, displacing all other sources of news and comment about the club. That would clearly not be ideal. Sometimes the blogger in chief goes awol. Arseblog works only by drawing on and aggregating other sources from the expert to the amateur.

But Arseblog is not going to become a monopoly provider of news about Arsenal. Instead what we have is a much richer information ecology, in which there is a good deal of collaboration—Arseblog feeds on experts in the newspapers but also directs readers to them—as well as competition.

I strongly disagree with Mr Leadbeater. Arseblog (with its erudite subtitle: "It's fuckin' excellent") doesn't contribute to "a rich information ecology" as a monopoly or otherwise. It's just a dark place on the Internet where Arsenal fans go to write their views about Arsenal football club -- a subject which is of no interest to the civilized world. There's nothing rich or informational about this user generated content. Like Arsenal football club and its supporters, Arseblog is fuckin' awful.

In contrast, American readers with an interest in reasonable quality user generated content by English football fans would be advised to look at My Eyes Have Seen The Glory.

Comments

[Danny Motion]

Come on you Spurs!

[John]

You are an idiot: plain and simple. Your hatred for eveloved media is unbelievable. You are well misinformed, ignorant to change, and inept to adapt to the new millenium. Yes, newspapers, magasines, and and books are important; these forms of communication will always be important and will always have viewers. However, you MUST realise that everything evolves, everything is constantly changing. If you believe that the world can stay in the 1900s before computers were even built, you cannot be taken seriously by anyone. It is ridiculous to believe that this "new media" is going to damage our society to the point of failure. The internet and the like allows for a wider distribution of content to vast amount of people. This will inform more people about current events than any newspaper could ever dream of. It is understandable for you to dislike YouTube or MySpace; however, if you don't believe in the common person having the ability to post whatever they want online at anytime, that means you do not believe in freedom, personal rights, nor the advancement of technology. I'm sorry if you do not agree with how technology is going; unfortunately, you alone cannot change such a system. However, I am not saying that I completely agree with how it is developing, but I also do not say that it is "rubbish" and not worthy of support nor respect.
You are way out of line and incredible in all of the arguments you are attempting to pursue in debates. I cannot take you seriously and cannot believe your ignorance. I hope you creep out of the hole you are in and discover how useful and meaningful the internet and "new media" can be. Like I said before, I do not completely agree with some media that is a part of this "movement"; however, I do not think it deserves to be condemned by people who believe it to not have any credibility. And if you do think the internet is credible only for the "news" that you believe to be news, you are out of your mind. I would rather have stupid content and worthless discussions online WITH the freedom of speech and choice to view that content or not than be FORCED to use the internet in a strict, "old-fashioned" manner. I like choice, and if one believes they want to post abnoxious content online for his or her own sake, I will choose to either watch it or not watch it: plain and simple. But to limit the possibility for someone to generate something of their own only holds down creativity, and our society would not be anywhere NEAR where it is today without the freedom of creativity.
I hope you come around to FINALLY seeing that society is NOT being destroyed by "new media", and it is, in fact, being developed and advanced so that our society can make something of itself, not be held back by people who believe paper is the only credible form of information.

[Brad]

This is my first visit to you site-I googled your name after a reference to you in an SF Chronicle story today (5/3/07).

I was interested in what you have to say. I spent a lot of time on Daily Kos during the November elections. At that time, DKos impressed me with its wealth of formally expensive electoral information. However, since those days, the site has become much less nuanced and sometimes devolves into a rather simple screaming match.

But I'm a big fan of Wikipedia and Linux user, so I came here to see what you thought. Unfortunately, thought seems to have been too high an expectation. Your dismissal of user driven content is more cultural than substantive. Your position is incredibly elitist, and it would be nice if you were a bit more honest about it. Here are the bits that convinced me:

"Arsenal is a minor soccer team based in a particularly undistinguished part of North London"--I'll ignore the oxymoron. When people in America say things like that, it's snob code for "poor" and/or "minority" communities. Either that, or it's snob code for "bland suburbs." Either way, dismissing a neighborhood as being "undistinguished" is intellectually lazy and, shall I say, lame.

"It's just a dark place on the Internet where Arsenal fans go to write their views about Arsenal football club -- a subject which is of no interest to the civilized world. There's nothing rich or informational about this user generated content. Like Arsenal football club and its supporters, Arseblog is fuckin' awful."--Yet another simple-minded dismissive comment. More snob code: "civilized world" (this is particularly foolish. I thought organized competetive team sports were sort of a hallmark of civilization. But that's not really what you meant. You meant "upper class world")

Your entire critique of Arseblog had zero substantive content. Are you that uneducated that you can't form a logical argument, or are you so reactionary that all you can come up with us calling people names? Or maybe you're just too lazy to think it through for yourself. Or maybe you're an elitist that simply can't stand the masses.

Regardless, it would be nice if you'd be honest about your cultural xenophobia.

[ak]

ok, you nailed me. I'm a cultural xenophobe and an elitist when it comes to the Arseblog website.

[ak]

ok, you nailed me. I'm a cultural xenophobe and an elitist when it comes to the Arseblog website.

[Eric Gauvin]

Let me get this clear. Charles Leadbeater says he likes a blog about his favorite soccer team and holds it up as an example of a "rich information ecology." I guess "rich information ecology" is very subjective and I would suggest that it is just a trendy catch phrase for "information." So for those of us who aren't so knowledgeable about Arsenal, Leadbeater seems simply to be saying, "I like reading a blog about my hobby. It provides more information than I used to get from the local papers." I think Andrew Keen was pointing out that this was a pretty bad example of digital utopia. Can anybody please explain what's so utopian about this?

[David Pleat]

This seems to me to be a pretty low blow against Arseblog from MyEyesHaveSeenTheGlory. Strategically, I don't see it being successful. Keen needs to reorganize his midfield and really close down Leadbeater's wide men. I predict an Arseblog win 1-0 with a last minute deflection after 90 mins of relentless MyEyesHaveSeenTheGlory pressure. Lucky Arseblog, as usual.

[Jeremy Jacobs]

Heard your rant on BBC Radio 4 this morning. Bit of a killjoy aren't you?

You're also a hypocrite. Promoting you book on the medium which you loathe so much.

[Patrick Dodds]

People really seem to take you seriously don't they? Weird.

[Arsenal Credit Card]

Football is such a beautiful game and should be kept well away from your stupid politics.