Gatekeepers need to stop calling themselves gatekeepers

“There are web2topians out there–Battelle and my friend Matt McAlister immediately spring to mind–who are convinced that the Googles (and Diggs and del.icio.uses and Amazons and Last.fms) of the future will do a vastly better job of steering people to what they want, such a good job that most of the gatekeepers of the current media universe will prove wholly extraneous.” #

This isn’t the first time someone has accused me of being a Web 2.0 blogger. Coincidentally, the same day Justin posted this, I was mocked by a local construction worker waiting for the bus with his buddies as I passed on my way to the office. He shouted to nobody in particular, #

“Man, you know what I hate? Dotcommers.” He watched me walk by stonefaced and waited for a response. The guys standing around him turned to look. Unsure still, he blurted out, “Architects, too. Hate all of them.” He got the laugh he was looking for. #

Jeez, am I that boring? Or that obvious and annoying? (Please don’t say anything. I think I know the answer.) #

  1. Gatekeeper is a metaphor that is completely off the mark on the Internet.

    It implies the existence of a wall, and the only way to the other side is through the gate.

    How meaningful is a gate propped up in the middle of an open field with no wall? How irrelevant is the gatekeeper when you can just walk around the gate?

    At best we have signposts that point to each other, some more than others. And these are not signposts on something so restricting as a road. These are signposts in a vast open space. And if any of those signposts presume to be gate, we just route around it.