Proponents of citizen media often talk about the democratic ideals inherent in the medium. And sure, it is certainly more democratic than mainstream media because the cost of entry has been lowered significantly. Instead of requiring printing presses and broadcasting infrastructure, to be a player in the citizen media industry, you only need a computer and an Internet connection.
Yet despite social justice efforts like the One Laptop Per Child program, there are many people in this world who have never owned a computer and never will. There are even more people who have never had an Internet connection in their homes and never will.
So a pertinent question, as we move from what I’m calling the proprietary media landscape dominated by corporations to the discursive media landscape made up of corporate media professionals and citizen media makers interacting with each other, is just how far have we really lowered the cost of entry?
Subsequently are we moving from a Western dominated media that serves corporate interests, to a Western dominated media that serves the interests of those involved in it? In other words, how many Iraqi or Afghani bloggers are there? What about Somalian or Zimbabwean bloggers?
There’s bound to be some, but not as many as middle-class, well educated people who dominated the media in the first place. So while the present situation in media might be an improvement over the past, just how much of an improvement is it?
