Internet Authorship Scrutiny

I hope by now this particular case hasn't been done to death, but I couldn't get my mind off of the vast expanse that is the internet when I was reading Adrian Johns' book.


His entire thesis is that our notions of veracity in print is not inherent- printed texts aren't reliable, authoritative, and their content isn't true by virtue of the fact that they are printed texts. The accuracy of the information in print is only possible with lots of effort and construction put into the system to make it so- and it's made so that we can easily digest it without any acknowledging of the work that goes on behind the scenes of printed materials.

His evidence is that throughout the early modern period when print was in its beginnings, textual media wasn't as solid and fixed as it is now. The Manuscripts article too discussed the mechanics of copying and how copies of texts were made in the early modern period. Johns' article discussed in detail that one could never really rely on text as some unfaltering source of true information, that if a reader picked up a book "he or she could not be immediately certain that it was what it claimed to be." He then discusses Tycho Brahe and how his distributed works differed from place to place depending on where they were made and the circumstances they were acquired in. It really challenges the idea that print culture promotes the basis of gaining knowledge, that "durable paper entities" are the foundation of learning.

That being said, we are experiencing the same thing all over again in this era regarding the dissemination of knowledge over the internet. As Johns argued, there weren't always the legislation, practices, and systems in place to guarantee the accuracy and authority of all printed media that we take for granted, and as I argue, there aren't totally solid and reliable systems in place to censor all of the information online, at least not nearly as well-established ones as we have for print today. The internet is a mess, simply put. With such a ridiculously large host of information out there planted by almost anybody and everybody worldwide, there's no control over who can post, when, where, and what. The systems we have established to authorize content online only really work for a small portion of the content. Things like Creative Commons and Copyright laws help make sure that some authors are credited for their work, along with other systems. But at the point the internet is at now, it's impossible to guarantee that information or media discovered online is accurate and true. Only after much scrutiny and research can we guarantee anything- very much like the world Johns discussed in the early modern era. There are definitely parallels with what he was saying about printed texts back then and texts online today.

I also couldn't help but notice how this tied in with something Ong said in work of his we had to read a few weeks ago- something about how oral accounts had much higher gravity and veracity than printed accounts back when print was just getting started, and nobody gave written accounts as much significance and weight as they do today.