We live in very strange times. Never before (at least in recorded history) do so many people have so much freedom to express their thoughts and feelings to so many others. The Masses literally have the power to publish to The Masses. No complex chain of editors, proofreaders, publishing houses, record companies, film studios… Just upload it and there it is. Anyone can publish anything to a  global audience. Information (and it’s evil twin, mis-information) are gloriously ubiquitous in our time. With the dawning of platforms such as Geocities and MySpace and more recently, YouTube, Pinterest, Facebook et al, ordinary Joes are provided with all with the power to post anything, on a whim, for consumption by all and sundry. And not only that: They can do it at no apparent cost.

Information (and it’s evil twin, mis-information) are gloriously ubiquitous in our time.

So as humans where does this put us? Has it enriched our lives? Are we happier? Perhaps we’re just smarter now that we have all this information at our fingertips? Are we closer to our fellow humans now that we can keep in touch with anyone on the planet instantly? Is it now The Human Race? One big happy family: All contributing to our collective knowledge for the benefit of our species? A priceless legacy to our descendants. Descendents who will doubtless reap the rewards of the exponential growth that blooms forth from the mass endeavour of the recording of the human experience; not only from nations’ viewpoints but also from the individuals that make up all the nations on the planet in our time.

The question of the validity of the Internet is one that is rarely considered in these days of digital hedonism. On the one hand we have the single greatest library ever constructed, but on the other we have a massive digital landfill. The Internet simultaneously answers all questions posed with truths and lies in almost equal measure. Which leads one to instantly suppose that it’s net worth could well be zero: If one takes into account the oft painstaking effort afforded by the myriad content creators, one could actually argue that it’s net worth is in fact negative. And it’s existence is a fundamentally floored storage mechanism for the accumulated concomitant knowledge and ignorance of mankind. 

So what’s the point? Why doesn’t The Louvre doesn’t display a fake Mona Lisa next to the real one? Perhaps because the real one is special in a way that the fake one isn’t. After all, the fake would have no reason to exist without the original. Perhaps it’s just that to see the actual Mona Lisa, one must actually visit The Louvre; The effort reflects the experience, and the experience is a personal one that is not the same for everyone. Although seeing the original fake renders that argument somewhat circular.

Actually, the digital age has simply reduced our capacity for experience in the same way that it reduces the fidelity of an analogue recording. It might seem superficially better and clearer through a new delivery mechanism, but we are imperfect beings and so we subconsciously reject anything that seems perfect at a deep emotional level. A perfect fake is inherently irrelevant.

The new digital age has afforded instant access to more information than ever before, but this is a double edged sword. Effort is part of what makes us human and something that is effortless is meaningless. Enjoyment of art, culture and the quest for knowledge for their own sakes are increasingly empty and fleeting now that these things are on tap. We turn on Spotify and listen to a random song by a band we like, or worse a genre radio station and we no longer have any connection to the artists. We simply consume the energy and time they expended in the creation of their art. Any thoughts of the time and effort that lead to the recording of the track we listened to so briefly barely feature in our thoughts as we are emotionally disconnected from the artists: All the time and effort spent learning to play instruments, looking for musicians, forming bands, practicing, gigging and finally recording are reduced to zero by the new delivery platform. We don’t even have the perceived comfort of owning the recording. There is nothing tangible to link us to the humans that entertained us ever so briefly.

And so we become more and more disconnected from our fellow humans. The world has always had creators and consumers, rich people and poor, those that are educated and those that are not, but now we see strange times where all have a platform. Anyone can create anything and distribute it, indiscriminately hoping that it will "go viral". 

Is this good for the creative type or must it lead inevitably to exploitation? It’s a different kind to be sure, but it definitely feels like exploitation. So this begs the question, if we’re all creating are we all bound for exploitation?