More than wethink: Networks of Mutuality

It was at the highly robust thought and talk Innovative Media for the Digital Economy Springboard Event (imde09), with a sequence of seven-minute quick fire sessions and led by a prestigious keynote - my favourite Web (we)thinking commentator - Charles Leadbetter that got my grey matter buzzing last week.

My fear, that I would only be partially satisfied by discussions from Leadbetter, wanting instead to seek answers and deliberations via direct audience questioning, were dissipated by his latitude for thinking about media.

Most affecting was the notion of a ‘Mutual Media’, an update from wethink's 'power of mass creativity', to describe the convergence of the ‘social', ‘productive’ and ‘communicative’ aspects of the Web as they appear today.

This was explained through the a-day-in-the-life of Charles’s 8-year old son, Ned, who is seeking to enjoy, talk and do with versions of ‘old’, ‘new’ and ‘industry’/‘corporate’ media. This involves the dipping into everything as aspects of all media: books, The Simpson’s, Disney’s web community Penguin Club, drawing (with pen, paper and animation applications) and Garage Band. From Ned we have a representation of how we all seek to enjoy, talk and do across numerous platforms and technologies.

The thing is, we (on the Web), and as part of the ‘wethink’ culture take such aspects for granted. Foreground by the various ease with which we take the opportunities to dip into and out of various forms of media. Perhaps our task is to simply write an email, inevitably this gets caught up, somewhere along the way, by updating Facebook; checking Twitter; posting to a blog.

Charles’s ‘doesn’t blog’, and he claims he’s 'not wired for daily updates and blogging’. Well wired or not, the notion of Mutual Media is suggestive of what Yochai Benkler's Wealth of Network's and the American Technologist David Weinberger have already hinted at – how we are all small pieces, only loosely joined together.

I composed the below diagram to explain such relationships. Rather than Charles's description of Mutual Media, I perceive of these as networks of mutuality.
Why networks and not media? Because networks best captures the constructive and proactive shape of connections we as individuals choose to share with others. Taken as a sequence of connections, it is these relations (rather than the media itself) from which individuals expect/anticipate a level of reciprocity and mutuality.

Whilst we may (as Charles pointed out) still be feeling around for the suitable language to describe such development, where we are all in agreement is how the Web is changing relationships, communication, and ultimately our society...