The concept of a “digital native” is an interesting one. It has been described thus:
“While I groan whenever the buzzword ”˜digital native’ is jockeyed about, I also know that there is salience to this term. It is not a term that demarcates a generation, but a state of experience. The term is referencing those who understand that the world is networked, that cultures exist beyond geographical coordinates, and that mediating technologies allow cultures to flourish in new ways. Digital natives are not invested in ”˜life on the screen’ or ”˜going virtual’ but on using technology as an artifact that allows them to negotiate culture. In other words, a ”˜digital native’ understands that there is no such thing as ”˜going online’ but rather, what is important is the way in which people move between geographically-organized interactions and network-organized interactions. To them, it’s all about the networks, even if those networks have coherent geographical boundaries.”
It still strikes me regularly how few mainstream journalists truly understand what the internet is doing to our work. The challenge to their authority is something to be celebrated, not feared. The ability to explore other cultures and gain insights virtually impossible before the rise of the web is what makes so-called new media far more provocative than anything that has come before (exhibit number one.)