I didn't say it was new. I didn't say that the internet created this false understanding. In fact, in the past and on my blog, I have endlessly pointed out that it is not. I am interested in how it is a continuation of something old, but with a twist.
there are a few so whats that i do think are interesting and worthy of investigating more thoroughly.
1. commodity fetishism. I think this new version of commodity fetishism would be interesting for a contemporary marx to analyze. I am particularly interested in the psychology and social-psychology of "free" where we provide companies with labor without realizing it. I'm especially interested in this as a variation on a quote from Marx, which I can't find right now. In that quote, Marx says that the ideology of capitalism is that the market exchange is even-steven: you get a job in exchange for labor. But then, he asks, how is it that the worker goes to the employer, hat in hand, begging for a job, quivering in his boots. (something like that).
this exchange is obviously different. no one is quivering in their boots to play mafia wars. but that's why i think an analysis along those lines would be interesting. Maybe something like, "how is it that people have come to believe that what's so totally cool is that stuff is free, and they feel they are ripping companies over, getting over on them (which is how my co-workers generally treat free stuff), when in actuality they are saving these companies money.
2. Rationalization. George Ritzer popularized this analysis years ago in a book called _The McDonalidization of Society_. It's an old process enabled by technology that ends up making consumers do more and more of the labor so companies can save money. This is just a new variation on self serve gas stations, self-serve soda fountains at Wendy's, and real estate agents who no longer provide you with a list of houses for sale based on an interview with you, but who say, "bring me a list of the houses you'd like to see. Here's our web site."
3. Denigration of Labor. I'd argue that the denigration of our own labor and others' is involved in both 1. and 2. I think it's important to think about that for the reasons I mentioned in a post where I talked about Sweden. In a socialist world, where we labor for ourselves and others "for free", how might these whole "free" thing be problematic - not from the perspective of someone like, say, andie who worries that human nature means cheating will be inevitable. but from the sociological perspective that says that human nature is created by the social practices in which we are engaged.
4. Baking our own Bread and Circuses. If, in the past, governments provided the hoi polloi with bread and circuses to pacify them, it's very interesting to me that we are now engaged in _baking_ our _own_ bread and circuses: private companies ask us, and we willingly participate in, being content generators, software testers, marketing research subjects, marketers, pr agents, advertisers, photographers, graphic designers, marketing writers, product researchers, product testers, usability testers, etc.
i sit in meetings once a week, plotting out how to get consumers to do all these things for us since, to do it on our own, wouldn't be financially possible on the company's budget. Obviously, this is related to the points above, but I separate it out because I'm endlessly fascinated by the aspect of using consumer labor to reduce labor costs.
shag
http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)