While reading an article on peer to peer networks, I’ve realised that, if we don’t take care, the Internet will quickly transform itself into a huge TV. Telecom Plus is planning to deploy that service in Mauritius by the end of 2004.
At first, this looks like a very good idea but then you realise there are a number of (flagrant) shotcomings :
(1) The Internet which is today a read-write medium (meaning that you can browse websites but also create your own website for example) will transform itself into a read-only medium controlled by big majors. Ordinary people like you and me will only be allowed to consume and pay. Most original content created by ordinaly people will never be accessed…
(2) Watching TV is only a passive activity. Most people tend to watch crap programmes anyway (in Mauritius at least). Having the TV on the computer will imply that most of us will stop using search engines to find (potentially) interresting information but will satisfy ourselves with crap Brazilian soaps. And this will be intellectually detrimental in the long run to the whole population.
(3) The Internet creates communities of people who share common passions. Watching TV is most of the time a solitary activity. Instead of communicating, people will waste time watching adsurd Indian soaps.
(4) ADSL in Mauritius is only 512kbit/s. An ordinary VCD (no, not DVD) requires about 1500 kbits/s which is 3 times more than we get with ADSL. So the image and sound quality of the TV transmission will be at least 2-3 worse than VCD. Can we accept that in 2004 in the era of DVD (and its 8000 kbits/s transfer rate) ?
To summarise, most of us will have less money, will be less intelligent, more antisocial and will have to watch images of crap quality.
So, I would like to propose that before launcing TV on the Internet in Mauritius, Telecom Plus (and the Mauritian Government who has an enormous responsibility towards the population) rather show people how to use the Internet, explain how to create their own Mauritian content (websites, pictures, music or whatever) and let incomming connections through ADSL pass (that is soooo backward and mentally retarded) so that schools and individuals can easily host their own contents.
Mauritians must become more intelligent… and you can’t do that watching Marimar.
Surely, you must be joking with this post. All forms of information dissemination media are good, the consumer has more choice.
Well, I don’t think this is a joke. There is some food for thought in what Avi said but maybe we need to look into the real issue at hand. To my mind, it’s rather linked with a question of media attention to what’s going on in the field of telecoms & Internet and therefore what is being ‘promoted’ on the public stage.
The pbm is that not many people in MRU have access to ADSL + those who have don’t even have the possibility of becoming content providers because of T+’s commercial policy.
So yet again this culture of just being users and spectators in the ‘TV’ sense of the word is being promoted and the wonderful opportunity of encouraging a culture of ‘expression’ for individual citizens is being completely ignored.
Le plus desolant, c’est que les medias ont rate le coche en reproduisant fidelement les contenus de communications commerciales sans vraiment se poser des questions fondamentales d’acces a la parole.
I am not joking at all.
For me, TV is unidirectional. And the Internet (and the Web) was not invented to work that way. Yeah, I know that only 5-10% of us create content. But it’s better than nothing.
Having TV on the Internet means that most users will only watch TV. Big majors are 100% behind that just to make money.
Those users will not create their own content.
The Internet has changed drastically during the last 5 years. It has transformed itself from a source of information into a big shopping center. Just do a search on Google and most of the time the first result will be a link to an online shop.
If TV becomes pervasive, your original content (and mine also) will completely disappear from the Noosphere.
And we don’t want that to happen, do we ?
I don’t think that the internet will ever be “just tv”. People will choose interactivity over a passive medium. Example: why are sites that enable users to interact with each other (e.g. via a forum) more popular than sites that just display static content?
I still think your analysis is flawed. Even if I have 50+ channels on cable TV in addition to my broadband connection, I spend more time on the computer than on the couch. On the other hand, my wife watches TV more although she regularly (read: every couple of hours) checks her e-mail or browse the Internet to find information about things that she sees on TV. Our case is not representative of a whole population, of course. But, it suggests that the situation is not as drastic as you put it.
You, yourself, bring another case against your argument: most people do not and/or will not have access to broadband. Without doubt, most of the Mauritian population have access to TV, with an increasing number subscribing to satellite TV as it becomes cheaper. Therefore, the arrival of a new medium for television programmes will not change much, as people will still be watching TV — whether it is via the Internet or over the airwaves. On the other hand, they will have more choice as what they watch, even alternatives to programmes such as Marimar! Which is good.
Putting aside the irrevocable value in terms of education, entertainment and knowledge of world events that this new medium will bring to Mauritians, there is yet another potential benefit. Consider that to this day, the MBC has been a lethargic institution that has had no interest whatsoever in improving its standards. While we cannot say for sure how Telecom Plus’s service will change that, it certainly has the potential to help develop local talents. Just like the arrival of private radios has improved a number of things via independent stations (as opposed to the state-manipulated MBC TV) — at least, from the general feeling I had when I was in Mauritius in December.
After all, the Internet, as it will be used, will just be another medium to broadcast TV programmes, just like analog and satellite TV. So, I cannot understand why you imply that when it comes, it will have a big negative impact on people’s lives. Perhaps, you have case if it turns out that the service is just another recurrence of the MBC-situation, where content is tightly controlled, but judging from I have seen with satellite TV and the Internet, the government is losing its grip on what people can watch.
I think that by now, you get my point. TV fosters creativity, just like any other media. There are some bad creations (Marimar?), but they are outweighed by the good ones. I would have thought that since you, yourself, filter what you watch by means of MythTV and Advisare, it would have been natural for you to assume that your peers will take a similar stand. In the end, I still do not understand your pessimism regarding the taste of others with respect to TV…
Hi,
I’ve spoken to someone at Telecom Plus who told me that they are not going to produce local TV programs, they’ll only broadcast existing satellite (foreign) programs…
In my post, I stated that “[…] before launcing TV on the Internet in Mauritius, Telecom Plus […] rather show people how to use the Internet, explain how to create their own Mauritian content […] and let incomming connections through ADSL pass […] so that schools and individuals can easily host their own contents.”
It means that :
(1) I am not against TV on the Internet as such
(2) As far as Mauritians (yougsters specifically) know “how to use the Internet”, know “how to create their own […] content” and “can easily host their own contents”.
It is a fact that those participating in this discussion know both worlds : content creation and content consumption.
But imagine a majority of the Mauritian population who only knows the consumption aspect of the internet.
How could we expect the country to prosper? How is research (applied or not) going to be done?
Mauritius wants to get into IT and financial services. For that to really succeed, we must develop the creative potential of the population.
And I know that it can be done if from a young age if children are thaught to read critically and write for others instead of competing against each other.
What about a ‘Weblog for All’ initiative ???
:-)
It is pointless to quote specific parts of the original article (that has undergone a few minor changes, by the way) because the overall feeling of the reader is that you are against Internet TV. Again, you miss my point: Internet TV is nothing big and should not generate that much fuss about its negative impact on (and necessary counter-measures for) the population, whether young or old. The fact that it is so in Mauritius is because it is a big change from the historic monopoly of Mauritius Telecom/Telecom Plus that arrives as a consequence of the liberalisation.
I do not have the specifics of how Telecom Plus plans to implement this, but I doubt it will allow users to watch programmes only through their computer monitors. I expect that there will be a decoder appliance like for satellite TV. In this respect, it will be just another TV. There will not be any impact on how people use the Internet other than what the current situation is. They may not Google as much as before, but that will not be a consequence of Internet TV; it will merely be due to a change in their preferences.
Creativity does not just arise like this. It is encouraged and inspired. Inspiration comes from a knowledge of what other “creators” are doing and what is happening in the surrounding environment (either local or global). Some people find inspiration in the Internet (open-source contributors, etc.) and others from TV (Peter Jackson admits being inspired by Evil Dead and the Thunderbirds) and the rest of the new media.
The government, or anyone for that matter, cannot hope to encourage creativity by trying to channel people’s interests. The only valid way to proceed is to provide them with a rich environment, that gives choice and inspiration.
> It is pointless to quote specific parts of
> the original article (that has undergone
> a few minor changes, by the way)
What are you talking about ???
Nothing, not a single character, has been changed. I take full responsibility about what I write and say. Everyone (except you it seems to me) know that :-)
> Creativity does not just arise like this.
> It is encouraged and inspired.
Yes !
My point is using the same medium for TV and ‘authentic’ Internet will confuse a lot of youngsters about the various merits of the Internet.
The situation is that, in Mauritius, a majority of youngsters sees the Internet through some kind of ‘visière’ that is Chat.
I know that most school and college curriculum (in Mauritius at least) do not have any kind of ‘how to use the Internet as a source of information and inspiration’. And, as a result, creativity is not being encouraged.
I see that everyday when I talk to 20-year old students (remember, I am a teacher) who don’t have a clue about what is hapenning in the world and the way they can change things.
As an aside, when I joke, I always say to my students : “If Einstein was a Mauritian, he would be a bricklayer”
> The government, or anyone for that matter,
> cannot hope to encourage creativity by trying
> to channel people’s interests.
It’s not about chanelling people interest. It’s about being a consumer and a contributor at the same time.
Sure, you can watch TV to be inspired. But then, you have to know about the means to share your creations to others.
And I fear that most of us here will completely forget about those existing means in some years owing to this incessant quest for easy money from big majors and corporations.
I am seriously thinking about a ‘Weblog for All’ initiative…
Well, “Marimar”, for one, has disappeared from the blog entry, but I digress.
It seems that we both feel very strongly about this issue. If the whole discussion could be condensed into a single sentence, it would be, Avinash thinks that bringing more TV to an already clueless society will make it even more clueless, whereas Eddy thinks that the more media there are, the more choices are available, the bigger the potential for inspiration and, by extension, creativity.
Let’s put an end to this discussion by stating that both arguments are valid. However, I cannot pass on the fact that your views are quite extreme on the subject.
You are mistaken about “chatters”. There is, in fact, proof that they do not limit their use of the Internet to this sole purpose. Have a look at http://www.mauritius.ca, and you will see that there is a community behind all these #mauritius channels. What is actually happening is, these young people are re-defining their communities. If you Google a bit more, you will find that there is a considerable number of Mauritians who maintain weblogs, that is, create.
At least, we do agree about the value of a “Weblog for all” initiative. Which I can assist you in implementing if you ever wish.
Tout est bien qui finit bien :-)
> At least, we do agree about the value of
> a “Weblog for all” initiative. Which I can
> assist you in implementing if you ever wish.
Thanks. I keep you informed.
BTW, Marimar is still there :-)
The situation is not so dramatic. I see this as one of the many steps of technological convergence and there’s nothing bad about it.
This discussion is about a framework for bringing about a world where everyone can live to their highest potential in mind and spirit. This is the main issue here.
Even though we’re tending to this type of mind-frame, we’re still really far from it. Whatever we do, there’ll always be a low ratio of Thinkers compared to Followers and in a sense I find it ‘tout-a-fait’ normal.
So bring on the peer-to-peer network and please O Father Christmas get me some decent channels and MUTV for christmas!
PS I highly recommend Celestine Prophecy by James Redfield… there’s still some hope ;-)
LOL i totally agree with you…therefore the question that needs to be asked is whether do you think an IT Minister needs somebody who has an IT related degree instead of a lawyer/attorney likewe have actually; so as he can understand the ‘rouage’ of technicalities of this ministry much better..