"Against the Machine"

There is a review of a book called "Against the Machine" in the New York Times today. The book is written by Lee Siegel, an author with whom I'm not familiar, however, from the review, it seems that he and I would not get along. He seems to have a very anti-technology stance and paints and sad portrait of people trapped in an online world to the detriment of actual social interaction. Even so, some of the points he makes in the book (pointed out by the reviewer) seem to be either accurate or eerily similar to class discussions:

"We are being persuaded that information and knowledge are interchangeable, he
claims, when they are not; we would have citizen heart surgeons if information
were all that mattered. And mainstream news outlets, which Mr. Siegel is
otherwise delighted to assail (his love-hate relationship with The New York
Times is particularly intense), suddenly look worthwhile to him by virtue of
their real, earned authority. Better the old press than the new tyranny of
bloggers. Their self-interest, he says, makes them more mainstream than any
standard news source could possibly be.
The vindictiveness and
disproportionate influence of the blogosphere is a particularly sore subject.
Who is it that “rewrote history, made anonymous accusations, hired and elevated
hacks and phonies, ruined reputations at will, and airbrushed suddenly unwanted
associates out of documents and photographs”? Mr. Siegel’s immediate answer is
Stalin. But he alleges that the new power players of the blogosphere have
appropriated similar powers."

While I can't say that I would buy this book, or read it if someone handed it to me it does raise some good points. As noted above, there is a vast difference between information and knowledge. The question raised in Ethics class today regarding whether or not journalism is a profession might also include that thought. Just because you CAN write an article, doesn't mean that you really know HOW to. Plenty of bloggers and "amatuer" journalist write complete garbage, because they have the information on how to do it, but they don't actually have the knowledge.
His statement about heart surgery calls to mind a commercial from a few months back where a man sits at his kitchen table and calls a surgeon and the surgeon begins to walk him through performing heart surgery on himself. I don't remember what the commercial was for, but the general point was: would you really want to do this by yourself?