4
votes
Richard Stallman on using the word "content" to describe works
Link information
This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.
- Title
- Words to Avoid (or Use with Care) Because They Are Loaded or Confusing - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation
- Word count
- 8443 words
Sounds like etymological fallacy. I don't think the word "content" in the current meaning implies a "commodity whose purpose is to fill a box and make money".
Same tbh. Some of the entries on that page reek of condescension, as if GNU (despite obviously being a hugely important org for giving users control of their software) is the ultimate authority on the use of the English language in relation to computing. My two favourite quotes:
Under "FLOSS":
"Neutrality" in this case not meaning FLOSS vs. proprietary software, but the free software community vs. open source. Not ashamed to admit that I still don't fully get the difference after reading every entry.
Under "Hacker":
While I'm familiar with both definitions, I know what my parents, and most of my friends, will say if I ask them what a "hacker" is...
I think the current use of "content" implies that the created works are to some degree transient. Even if the actual creation stays in the platform for years, it is only relevant for a period of time. It feeds into the consumerism attitude that you read / watch / listen to something once, or maybe some limited amount of times, and then you forget about it and get obsessed with something else. It is indeed the way a production company would see its creations, as opposed to something more permanent like a old painting or book.
I think it is fine as a term. Youtubers are most of the time actual production companies anyway. No one is trying to create cultural milestones, just stuff that is interesting enough that people watch their adds or subscribe to some kind of patronage.
Not trying to be judgemental about not creating cultural milestones either. I think focusing on patronage rather than great works is the right move for an art/culture/content creator nowadays. I think a word like "works" is more useful for someone like a critic, or maybe someone analyzing the "content" from outside the context it was created in. It feels too big and important for a creator or its public, honestly.