Simulcra FTW!

How the “link economy” reminds me of post-modern theory i (tried to) read in college.

I went to college at Williams in the late 90s, when Mark C. Taylor was a professor there…Mark is a dynamic, passionate and thoughtful teacher, and I dove head-first into the murky depths of psychoanalysis and post-modernism theory through his inspiration. I wrote a paper, called (I kid you not): “Addressing the Threat to Dialectical Structure Posed by the Female Cyborg.” And got an A.

To be honest, this stuff was pretty much over my head, and now I reflect back on it with a wry chuckle. But several themes resonated, including those presented by Baudrillard in Simulacra and Simulation, in which he discusses how modern media society has replaced reality with symbols – the Simulacrum. Some of his most seminal writing is about the First Gulf War, and how the images of war (broadcast via CNN) came to supplant the reality of war.

Um, OK. So what does this have to do with the modern Internet? “The Link Economy“ is a term coined by Jeff Jarvis, a professor of Journalism at NYU. Jarvis is bearish on paying for content (to put it lightly), and instead of thinks that monetizing links is how “content creators” can make money.  In his own words: “Let’s say that the real value in this equation (meaning journalism on the Internet) is not content and information – both of which are now quickly commodified – but links, which are the new currency of media.”

When I read this, I thought: “How Baudriallardian”

Jarvis’ argument calls for prioritizing the signifier over that which is signified (to indulge in a little wordplay.) It is not the “real stuff” that is important, but the links to that “real stuff” The problem here, as Baudrillard laments, is that real meaning (or value) starts to fade. When A links to B links to C links to C, we have just closed a loop without creating any value other than the perception of value which never arrives. (Totally could have written that line in college paper). Simulcra FTW!

To translate this into more stark business terms: where’s the money? If everyone just outsources value capture to the other guy, then nobody gets paid. (And as Dave McClure says, “the Internet wants to get paid on f-in Friday.”) For that to happen, at some point, somebody needs to capture value, in order to anchor the entire system. Otherwise it’s nothing more than one big pyramid scheme…or maybe in this case an “infinite loop scheme” is a more apt term?

p.s. I still have that crazy paper on the Internets!