In this informal YouTube conversation, Tom Guarriello, Ph.D., and Peter (Geriatric1927) discuss their plans for a collaborative video while reflecting on the broader debate about amateur content on the internet. They introduce Andrew Keen’s recently published book The Cult of the Amateur, which argues that the proliferation of user‑generated media dumbs down culture and produces “crap.” Peter counters that blogging and video‑sharing are valuable forms of communication that enrich lives, rejecting the notion that only credentialed experts deserve a platform. The pair explore themes of egoism, credentialism, and the tension between traditional authority (printed books, reputable journalism) and newer, crowd‑sourced knowledge sources like Wikipedia. They reference a past controversy involving a Guardian article that labeled Peter’s work as “banal,” and they joke about potential libel risks and the need for a lawyer. Tom mentions a dialogue between Kevin Kelly and Andrew Keen that he plans to link for viewers, and both agree to keep the final video short and “crappy” for comedic effect. The conversation blends humor with a thoughtful defense of democratized publishing and the legitimacy of amateur voices online.
Chapters
Well, hey guys, it's Tom. Uh, I just finished having a delightful conversation with, uh, Geriatric1927, Peter. Um, we'd been planning on making a video together for some time. Uh, he foolishly put me in charge of technical details, which really was a mistake. Uh, I've screwed up a couple of things a couple of times, but, um, I think I'm gonna Uh, just let the video speak for itself about our conversation. We had a lot of fun, and I hope you guys enjoy it. So take care, see you soon.
Bye.
I did see the video, of course, from some Brazilian guy.
Yeah, wasn't that wonderful?
I thought that was quite something.
Yeah, it was. Yeah, he, uh, he did set He explained it also very well, and I don't think we could better that. I don't think anybody really could come up with a better answer to the question, why do we do this blogging? Yeah, I thought it was wonderful, and I put it in my favorites in the hope that other people will see it.
I thought it was terrific as well, and you know, I don't know if you're if you're familiar with this new book that's just been published, a book called The Cult of the Amateur, written by a fellow named Andrew Keene.
No, I am not. No, tell me.
Keene is a guy who— there's a line of thinking about the internet and about blogging and about, of course, YouTube that goes something like this: by making it ubiquitous for people to be able to do what we do, for example, that what we're doing is dumbing down the culture and producing a bunch of what Keane indelicately calls crap. And he says—
that doesn't encourage me, Tom.
I'm just telling you that's what the man says. What the man says is all we're doing is producing a bunch of idiotic crap. Now, what would we say to Mr. Keane, do you think, Peter?
Well, the word bollocks comes first into my mind. I mean, we are not producing a load of crap. We are communicating, and what a wonderful thing that is. Enriching each other's lives by communicating. Well, I don't think it's crap at all.
Isn't it interesting though that the idea that the only people who are supposed to be in a position to have their thoughts widely read and viewed are experts, which is what Keane's point is, Isn't it interesting that that would, um, it's, it's, it's gotten some traction on the web because there are people who believe that in fact he's absolutely right and that all of this is a bunch of rubbish produced by a bunch of narcissists. I think the issue of egoism is one that we've talked about before.
We have, yes.
Um, and you know, I find it, I just find it intriguing that that this notion that only specially sanctioned people are supposed to be able to, you know, make their views broadly known, that that would be okay. It's an extraordinary notion to me.
Yeah, me too. It rather sort of is saying that we are all idiots without any intelligence. Or anything, and I'd not like to think that that was true. I remember I had one article written about me in our newspaper called The Guardian, and he described what we were doing as banal, and all of my fans really attacked him like crazy, and everybody sent emails to The Guardian and really shot him down.
You may or may not recall that that was in fact one of the catalysts for one of my first videos, was responding to that gentleman's characterization of you as banal, when in fact I thought that what you'd done was to describe— and this really goes to the heart of my reaction to Keane's book, because what I experienced when I heard you and saw you speaking, which is a crucial element, isn't it, seeing one another?
Yes, oh, absolutely.
But one of the first things I thought was, well, now here's a thoughtful gentleman sitting in his home in the Midlands of England who I never would have gotten an opportunity to listen to or see were it not for this technology, and I'm happy that I've gotten the chance to do so.
Yes, well, uh, yes, we, we all are. I mean, we have all made many, many friends and communicated in all sorts of levels with all sorts of people. So, um, oh, that's good.
I do think that the idea that our own experience is not to be trusted— I mean, here we are watching and listening to people who we've become fond of. We've— we now trust their their perspectives on issues that they discuss. And our experience is, here's a person who's saying something worthwhile, that in fact that perspective is, is supposed to be ignored now because the people that we're listening to don't have special credentials to be able to have that.
And, and I don't know what these special credentials are because You and many others are highly qualified with many degrees, highly educated, have written books yourself. There are so many people who have wonderful credentials, probably much greater than Mr. Keane. And so who the hell does he think he is?
Peter, I think you've hit it on the head that just because we may not work for famous publications or for famous universities. There's another fellow who is out there with a similar line of reasoning who used to be an editor at the— well, I probably shouldn't talk about this because this was a client of mine. Oh no. But a very, very well-respected university crimson-clad university, in fact, in Cambridge, Massachusetts. I won't mention the university, but this fellow was also— is also very much on this side of the equation that, you know, this is really a— there's a whole lot of tut tut going on, you know, tut tut. Who are these people and what are they doing dumbing down our culture, of all things?
Well, yes, and although I respect journalists and they have a certain command of English, it's not really the top of the pile as far as academic academia goes, is it?
I think, you know, the power of the printed word has always been sort of mesmerizing for us, hasn't it? You know, it's in a book, you know, it has to be right. It's like when people talk about Wikipedia, you know, they say, well, you know, Wikipedia There's an awful lot of junk in Wikipedia, and in fact there is an awful lot of junk and misinformation in Wikipedia, unlike of course some of these other books that I have, you know, piled around my office here. These are all gospel, of course.
Yes, well, that was quite an interesting discussion, and I think we could shoot him down if we met him. And maybe you, being a very erudite scholar, you might like to write him a letter and put those points of view to him.
I think what I'm going to do is to let this video speak for itself. I will put a link to a very interesting dialogue that this fellow had with Kevin Kelly. Kevin Kelly is a really erudite man, one of the founders of Wired magazine, in fact probably the founder of Wired magazine. I just read a terrific dialogue that he had with Keane, and I think I'll put that up to give people some of the flavor of the discussion that's going on around this thing.
Yes, and when you do Perhaps you'd like to email the address of your lawyer who's going to protect us with all the libelous things that we have just said.
That's terrific. I've never been sued by anyone famous. It'll be great. Yeah, maybe English law will somehow protect us, Peter, right?
I doubt it. Even if it could, we can't afford it.
Well, I think that's probably good for the video portion of this conversation, Peter. I'll, uh, we don't want to be too long. If we're going to be crappy, we might as well be short.
Yes, short and crappy.
Short, short, short. That would be good, yes. There's a marketing approach, isn't it? Crappy but not too long, you know.
