Change

Having a big discussion lately about the future of journalism (you know: is there one?), and what we, as journalism educators, should do to ensure that some part of the New New Really New Journalism, includes some critical thnking, best practices, etc.

But, the problem isn't that the key elements (ethics, writing, thinking, etc.) have changed. They haven't. The prrblem is how the inforrmation (presented as knowledge) is communicated. We don't have that old sender - message- receiver rubric to fall back on (except if we want to be stubborn). We have, instead, something that really hasn't shaken out. Unless you are selling something, the future of the web is a very unpredictable thing. Sadly, in about a week, I will be telling very impressible students (the others just sleep) what the future of the web might be. Just educated guesses. I have, at least, the assurance that I'll probably be wrong, and this will not be a terrible thing. After all, Negroponte wasn't even in the same galaxy with his predications in 1996. And he's a genius.

So, I might posit the idea that the web will be largely A/V, with fewer and fewer words.

Maybe it will be sliced up into turf owned by various mega-mega-corporations.

Maybe it will be reinvented, cleaned up, run faster, and share data easily (Semantic).

Maybe it will be storing all data seemlessly and without ownership.

Maybe it will be regulated so forcefully as to render it useless as an information sharing tool.

Maybe all applications will migrate to the center, leaving the edges more akin to the "dumb monitors" of the 1970s anf 80s.

Maybe all of todays web will be built exclusively for hand-helds, with larger desktops simply going away.

Maybe those desktops will melt into the household/business landscape, becoming parts of the furniture/cabinets/devices we already use (toasters?).

Maybe all interaction with a computer will be verbal (as in Scotty talking to the computer in one of those Star Trek flicks).

And, maybe we will finally see the concepts of creativity and ownership as being less at odds and that the common good is at least as important as the individual's profit from the common good.

Then again, maybe not.