The entire history of human expression, slightly abridged
Okay, so, this guy kind of blew my mind.
I don’t know if it’s because I’ve been thinking about Web 2.0 so much (because I’ve been reading about it so much), but it’s just nice to be reminded that a lot of this stuff has been going on for a long time, this battle (is that too strong a word?) in education between the status quo and people who want classrooms to be more active, more project-oriented. Project-based learning isn’t new, and the Internet didn’t invent it.
The biggest hit I had watching the videos again (for the whateverth time now) was the difference that Wesch draws between Information Literacy, Meta-Media Fluency, and Digital Citizenship (it’s possible that those are unnecessary capitalizations). Being able to understand the arguments that are occurring on the Internet is not the same as being able to move freely between media, and that, also, is different than the willingness to take on the power and responsibility that come with those increasingly powerful tools.
Also, Wesch got me on the concept that the Internet and Web 2.0 affordances don’t just allow communication, they mitigate it, they control it to a certain extent. Skype and Instagram and Twitter don’t enable, or even approximate, telepathy. In many ways, communicating more (if that’s fair to say) with each other makes relationships more complicated, more of a performance, maybe, and in some cases less intimate (in many instances, FAR less intimate).
This complication does not only apply to interpersonal communication, but to the way in which we speak to and understand ourselves. Go through your photos on Instagram. Do all of those styles, objects, people, belong to the same creative consciousness? Are they similar or different, stylistically, aesthetically? Does the dissonance between the styles create any meaning for you? Would it, to an objective observer?