Thursday, May 19, 2011

The internet

After a long hiatus from the blog which saw me edit my second film, graduate, and answer the question "what are you doing this summer" 500000 times, I am back. And I am back with a topic that isn't sports related, but sure to blow your mind nonetheless (and I'll probably end up making it about sports anyway).

Yesterday, Klosterman was on the Simmons podcast. Klosterman made a point that the internet has eliminated the "know it all" guy that people once knew. He gave an example that you used to be able to go up to somebody at work and say "there was this movie, and Joe Schmoe was in it, and there was this car chase, and the bad guy falls off the bridge," and the know it all guy would know what film you were talking about. Now, one could go on the internet and find out all that info, marginalizing the know it all guy.

He said this all in good fun, but we have to realize that the internet has marginalized other, real professions.

Friends of mine (and myself) have worked at internships in the Hollywood industry. One of the many duties all of us were required to do was what amounted to the basic role of "researcher." Our boss would say "look this up," and "this" might be a name, a date, a series of events, etc. All of this amounted to nothing more than a simple google search though. It wasn't as simple as typing in "who was the lead in 'Psycho'" and getting results (and nobody in Hollywood doesnt know this btw), but still, the searches never amounted to anything more than a few revisions, a few changes in a key word, a couple of steps, and 10-15 minutes of your time total. Beyond the fact that people are lazy and you would rather have someone else look shit up for you, why would this position ever exist now-a-days?

Information was printed and recorded before, of course. I had a 1993 SI almanac of sports statistics (not as cool as the Grey's Sports Almanac). But, I could look in it, and see that Canseco led the league in home runs in 1988. So I knew that. But beyond that, I would need to go somewhere else for his biography, or even look throughout the rest of the book to cross reference his other statistics. Now, as you all know, I can type in his name, and seconds later have his bio, his life, all his statistics, his mark on baseball, his stats in comparison to other players of all time, etc, etc. I realize that this is nothing new to you, but the point is that at one time, a researcher position required some leg work, and could therefore actually be seen as a worthwhile position. I thought of this because I somehow likened the position of researcher to "know it all," as Klosterman brought up.

But then I got to thinking about what other positions were affected or marginalized by the internet. The first profession I thought of was the job of a plumber.

Twenty years ago, if you had a clogged sink, and you had no idea how to fix it (I have no idea now), your first instinct would be to call the plumber. He would come over and fix it. Now, you can go online and find how to fix a clog within seconds. Then you can evaluate if its a job you can do, or if a plumber is still needed. So in this regard, you can say that the internet almost totally eliminated the need for a plumber (they're still needed for instillation and shit like that, but you can imagine that theyre less in demand as a whole).

Another position a friend of mine brought up was that of a Mechanic. Same thing here. As Z points out, mechanics made a living based off the ignorance of consumers (not all with bad intentions). Now, we can look up and see how to change our air filter, or if we need to change it at all period.

This is what is presented to us - the 'good' side of the internet. Now we can say "im not calling a plumber, I can do this myself." In the process, we save time, money, dont get screwed by a plumber, and learn a little bit about pipes and increase our knowledge as a whole. What is forgotten in this process is that plumbers, for the most part, are not needed in our society anymore.

This reality is brought to our attention from time to time, but only in the case of massive industries. We know that Borders is closing because of Amazon's dominance. The same is true of Blockbuster and independent video stores closing due to Netflix. Other 'mom&pop' shops are closing in whaatever field because of the internet. We all know this. This is no different than the argument of years ago that Starbucks is killing independent coffee shops, Supermarkets are killing individual grocers, and Wal-Mart is killing everything. But again, we neglect talking about individual positions.

So my question then is, what jobs/professions/skills, are "internet proof," - if any? I believe that it comes down to skills that a) the internet cant replicate actually doing b) skills that few know, c) skills that even if you learned, you cannot perform yourself.

a) and b) are somewhat similar, but allow me to elaborate. I think it has gotten to the point where the internet can teach us anything, so a) boils down to this. I can go to MITs website, and watch all the virtual classes they have (and they do, and this is great). I can theoretically take a class on mechanical engineering. I can even go buy the textbook that the class uses, and do the homework on my own, and pretend that I am a student in the class. Even if I take this 100% seriously, do my homework, somehow take a test, and actually pretend that I am a student, NASA will not hire me to build their rockets. I don't need to elaborate on this anymore.

b) Skills that few people know is similar. One thing that needs to be pointed out is that the internet has actually created a few of these. We are at a time where a great majority of us do not know how to program. We cannot make our own programs, websites, do IT, etc (I can't really elaborate because I don't know any of this myself.) I feel that in 20 years, however, most of us will be able to. Imagine that 20 years ago not everyone knew how to use microsoft word/works, excel, powerpoint - but now the thought of someone not being able to do is unimaginable. I think that programming is going to follow a similar path.

c) Skills that people require from others. My example of this would be a surgeon. I could go on the internet and learn everything I could about coronary bypass surgery. I could read the same textbook they read at Johns Hopkins. However, if I needed surgery, I couldn't give it to myself, and if someone I knew needed surgery, I wouldn't be able to give it to them. Therefore, despite the fact that I could theoretically know more than a surgeon (this is of course a stretch), I would never be able to take a surgeon's job on unless I went to medical school, I was board certified, etc. The same is true of lawyers. I could read all the textbooks they do, know everything that would be on the Bar Exam, but never be able to step into their shoes.

Perhaps none of this is even true. Again, Z argues that even doctors and lawyers positions are affected by the internet. While 20 years ago, we would listen to a doctor and do whatever he said, now we can go online, check our own symptoms, become more knowledgeable, compare doctors, etc. Its a minor detail, and it seems hard to think of arguing with a surgeon over your diagnosis, but it is worth pointing out regardless.

So I ask the following. Has the internet caused more harm than good? Is it sad that there is no need for plumbers now, or is it nice to say "fuck them, they're all crooks anyway" ? What jobs are akin to plumbers or mechanics in that they are drastically affected by the internet's database? What jobs or skills are 'internet-proof," if any?


And to prove I can make this about sports; I'll mention that its 106 days until college football starts.

No comments:

Post a Comment