Rise of knowledge analyzers.
While raw date such as statistic, quotes, government documents will become increasingly assessable and freer. Knowledge analyzer who have reach to ever more relevant date will be valuable as they are able to understand the significant of seemly unconnected and incoherent raw data and reproduce its in an organized manner. In short the money are with data analyzers not finders.
Rise of tacit knowledge.
Our world is a competitive place. One of the most important sources of competitive advantage is knowledge. The effect of ICT on knowledge is really only on the codify-able form of knowledge, this is the kind of knowledge that is able to be transform in to communicable for of data like language, photos or sound etc. ICT has almost no effect to tacit knowledge, a kind of knowledge that you know but unable to put into communicable form. We all know a thing that is really difficult to put into words, like for example knowledge about how to swing a golf club. ICT has made some previously hard to communicate tacit knowledge into communicable forms like for example a person’s face. It’s really difficult to explain what person looks like yet we know when we see it. Graphic device like a camera has made this tacit knowledge communicable. How do we gain tacit knowledge? Well like golf, your have to do it to know it. In short, ICT advancement place a premium on learn by doing.
The best thing about public creating content and distributing it is that we are not profit driven entities in the sense that modern media are profit driven. This is not to say public bloggers are not bias (we all are), but the fact that bloggers are driven by diverse range of biases ensuring a level of diverse opinion. I suspect one of the reason why media outlet where not critical enough of Bush’s “slam dunk” case for the Iraqi war was simply because war sells news. Daniel Drezner an academic blogger argues bloggers or public content creators pass collectively pass information and opinions between each other. These collective actions are not only able to raise and change the agenda of public discourse but also influence the focus of the mainstream media.
I argue in one previous article that the enormous power that ICT give individuals ofter information may have a polarizing effect because people are given greater ability to read only what they want to read and block out the rest. A recent article by BBC News report on a research finding claims that information may lead to greater geographical polarization of our society in the real world by providing information regarding the status of each neighborhood (avg income, ethnicity etc). While some people have argue blogs often provide links to comments they are criticizing therefore limiting the extent of polarization. Do we read them? Aren’t we more incline to read sympathizing views?
To be edited…