Joho the Blog
|
|
|
March 12, 2007
The esteemed Henry Jenkins responds to an online discussion of whether Second Life has any political effect on first life. Henry begins:
After all, we each really only have one life and there is really only one world Henry concludes (but do no miss what's in between!):
We do this as individuals on the Web, trying on roles and characters as if they were clothing, seeing which ones fit and which ones pinch under the arms. And Henry gives good examples of ways in which SL experiences can affect the first life politics of individuals. E.g., maybe you visit the SL Dafur Village and have your eyes opened, or you're able to hang out with other gay people even though you live in a rural and repressed part of the world. Henry's piece clears out objections to SL as merely "masturbatory," to cite the strongest criticism from the mailing list. This raises to prominence - and leaves us with - two basic questions, both of which are entirely familiar to workers in the field: (1) The Internet overall enables people to get information they otherwise would not have found and to find others with shared interests. What do the specifics of SL enable that the other services of the Internet do not? (2) Does (or will) SL affect the way we organize socially and politically, rather than "merely" affecting individual perception? If, for example, a particular SL domain works splendidly, will we be able to transfer the organizing principles to first life or will the virtual particulars of SL make that impossible? Suppose, for example, that the SL success depends on continuous anonymous bodily presence. That's not something we can readily do in the real world. Are there examples already of a SL experience having an organizational effect on first life? Does collaborating (or bullying) in SL make us more like to collaborate (or bully) in first life? Are SL kibbutniks more likely to be real world kibbutniks? I don't know. But I'm glad Henry and the folks on the mailing list (among others) are working on it. By the way, on March 21, at 6 or 6:30 (I don't remember which), I'm scheduled to hold a Berkman "Web of Ideas" discussion of how participatory culture encourages participatory democracy. It's open to all. And I can tell you right now my answer to the question: I Don't Know. But I bet the names Henry Jenkins and Yochai Benkler turn up in the conversation. [Tags: henry_jenkins second_life participatory_culture democracy politics ] Posted
by D. Weinberger at March 12, 2007 08:17 AM
|
Comments
Quite hilarious stuff.
"In some cases, the Second Life opens up experiences that would not be possible within the constraints of the real world."
That's true. Very few TV reporters are attacked live on air by a flock of flying penises!
Posted by: pb | March 12, 2007 11:08 AM
In answer to the question you raise of what SL has to offer that we don't already get from the web, I think the answer is: a richer experience. I can already chat via text with people from all over the world (if I know where to find them) but being in the same virtual space and seeing each other's body language sets a tone.
Moreover, having such things as *spaces* opens up opportunities for new kinds of interaction. For example, now that there is a "Capitol Hill" in Second Life, people can go there and protest. While this may lack the direct impact of actually standing in front of our elected officials, it does have a big impact on the participants' connection to each other and to the issues they are addressing. And besides, how often does Congress personally observe protests in DC? Most often we are working for press coverage which might leak up to them. The same effect applies to political events in Second Life.
A recent example of this is the Avatars Against the War demonstration from last January. http://del.icio.us/tag/j27sl We filled up the "sim" (ie: had the maximum number of avatars allowed in a space) and generated tons of interest from bloggers as well as a little MSM coverage. We also reinforced the dawning realization for many users that SL can be used for more than sex and money.
Almost every critique I hear of organizing in SL parallels the skepticism I heard 10 years ago trying to convince nonprofits that this new thing called The Internet would be an important tool for advocacy. Many folks thought that notion was downright silly, but now they are struggling to catch up and paying out the nose for remedial web sites. SL (or something like it) is simply the next generation of how people will interact online.
Posted by: Ruby Sinreich | March 21, 2007 09:09 AM