I live in the UK, and GodBlogCon has passed over me, but apparently is was a conference for discussing new media from a Christian perspective. Andy from Think Christian posted a summary of John Mark Reynolds’ talk.
Andy summarises thus:
The day is not far off when these new media outlets will be brought under the control of a few major profit-driven players, and Christians will be marginalized again if we haven’t taken the initiative to leave our mark on it.
I don’t agree with this. Blogging and the so-called ‘new media’ are different to newspapers/films/tv etc., in the sense, that large players cannot control it so easily. In the sense that they cannot control the Internet. To make and distribute films or newspapers widely requires big financial outlays, but blogging and social networking are different. They reach out on a more personal, individual level and cannot be interfered with so easily.
Of course, some countries (or employers) can block access to websites, but Internet privacy and freedom are other issues.
Maybe I am missing the point of his talk, but even from the GodBlogCon website report on his speech it says:
More players get in the game, the standards are raised, small players will become squeezed out.
Neither do I think that:
The revolution is in its final stages.
Because, although many cannot see how technology can go further, it is still a minority of world’s population who are online, let alone contributing to the blogosphere or attached to social networks. And surely that is the difference. While technology may be nearly there, the things that matter (people) are not.



6 comments
Comments feed for this article
2 November 2006 at 7:13 pm
hayseed
I’ve been wondering if this new media (blogging, et al) will somehow start undercutting traditional ways that Christians reach out and serve others. It seems like there is a lot of ministry going on outside of the church nowadays and is not controlled by the church. I’m kind of thinking of “emerging” stuff that I’ve been hearing so much about. It seems some of the top-down hierarchal churches/ministries are none too happy about “the people” taking it in their own hands. Ha, I just heard Kramer in my head. “That’s right, Jerry. We’re going to do it like they did in the 60s. We’re taking it to the streets!!!” LOL. Good ole Kramer.
2 November 2006 at 9:44 pm
David
Thanks for the comment. I live in the UK and wonder who is Jerry Kramer. Looking at the Wikipedia, it seems he is a sportsman. Is that who you mean?
There have been free churches for years, which are independent of church authority, nothing is really changing there. It is still the personal testimony that will have the greatest effect on non-Christians. Anything else can just feel phoney, but the impact of the life-example of a Christian work-colleague is immense.
3 November 2006 at 8:49 am
Victor Kaonga
I come from a country where new media is really new! The Christians therefore are affected by the geography and economic development of the country and not because they are Christians.
It would be interesting to know actually if any media is Christian in itself.
Otherwise, I am of the view that Christians are not. Historically, Christian testimony has been more influential than the technology. In any case, non Christians always hijack the developments. Think of the printing press and the radio industry. But if we have more Christians behind the new media or indeed in new media, then we will just have to ask ourselves if we our testimonies are any effective later on.
3 November 2006 at 3:09 pm
David
Victor wrote:
Unless you count prayer/intercession etc. as forms of media, then the answer is probably no.
I can sort of imagine that when television was invented, some in the church thought this would be the answer to their evangelisitc prayers: audio+visual straight into people’s homes.
Now we have cable Christian channels on 24 hours, which no one watches.
But like television, the Internet allows educuation. People using these mediums (TV/Internet) can learn about Christ and then God can do the rest in their hearts whether that is Malawi or Merthyr Tydfil.
3 November 2006 at 9:22 pm
hayseed
Two persons. Jerry Seinfeld is a comedian who had a show on TV and it is still in syndication I believe… it is called “Seinfeld” .. Kramer was a slapstick comedian on the same show.
4 November 2006 at 8:13 am
David
Ah, thanks. That makes more sense. Seinfeld was on British television, but I never watched it. Cheers.