The People's Platform: Taking Back Power and Culture in the Digital Age

by Astra Taylor

From a cutting-edge cultural commentator, a bold and brilliant challenge to cherished notions of the Internet as the great leveler of our age

The Internet has been hailed as an unprecedented democratizing force, a place where all can be heard and everyone can participate equally. But how true is this claim? In a seminal dismantling of techno-utopian visions, The People's Platform argues that for all that we "tweet" and "like" and "share," the Internet in fact reflects and amplifies real-world inequities at least as much as it ameliorates them. Online, just as off-line, attention and influence largely accrue to those who already have plenty of both.

What we have seen so far, Astra Taylor says, has been not a revolution but a rearrangement. Although Silicon Valley tycoons have eclipsed Hollywood moguls, a handful of giants like Amazon, Apple, Google, and Facebook remain the gatekeepers. And the worst habits of the old media model--the pressure to seek easy celebrity, to be quick and sensational above all--have proliferated online, where "aggregating" the work of others is the surest way to attract eyeballs and ad revenue. When culture is "free," creative work has diminishing value, and advertising fuels the system. The new order looks suspiciously like the old one.

We can do better, Taylor insists. The online world does offer a unique opportunity, but a democratic culture that supports diverse voices and work of lasting value will not spring up from technology alone. If we want the Internet to truly be a people's platform, we will have to make it so.

Genres: Nonfiction, Technology, Politics, Sociology, Internet, Cultural, Business

288 pages, Hardcover

First published October 2, 2012

About the author

Astra Taylor is a writer, documentary filmmaker, and activist. Her films include Examined Life, and her books include The People’s Platform.

Reviews

[Derek Kompare · Rating 4 out of 5]

I've been looking for this book and didn't know it. More precisely, I've been frustrated that so much critical work on digital media and online culture has been polarized into cheerleading or doomsaying. Taylor takes down this dichotomy by focusing her attention not so much on the "end-user" experience (though she has some thoughts on that as well) but on how the architecture of the internet has fostered neoliberal regimes of economic extraction and personality cults. The gist of her critique is that the "openness" of the internet isn't all that open or equally accessible to all, and that free culture advocates (notably, for her, Lessig and Shirky) don't acknowledge the entrenched economic power that still set the parameters for how things work online. I was particularly impressed with the sections on the click-bait economy and the problem with piracy. While she loses a star for some possibly loosey-goosey citation (a common problem with journalistic work like these), this is an important contribution to moving the debate forward about digital culture. If you liked the general idea of Jaron Lanier's work, but (like me) were frustrated with its digressions and lack of specificity, this is a great book to check out.

[Ben Bush · Rating 5 out of 5]

Taylor lets the air of TED Talks' tires in one of several brilliant take-downs of libertarian spokespeople for the tech industry. Her arguments: convincing. Taylor critiques the way digital life is damaging the democratic underpinnings of culture without coming across as a Luddite, but instead of focusing on economic and regulatory factors. I would like to live in a world with the kind of internet and media culture that she describes. I'd been awaiting the release of this book for sometime after being dazzled by her "Serfing the Web" piece for The Baffler.

[Naum · Rating 4 out of 5]

A downer, but an essential read for the 21C, nevertheless.

Documentary filmmaker Taylor skewers the romanticism of utopian new net heralds. That the promise of an open, democratic internet has been subverted by corporate overlords, monopolistic titans, public relations shills, and destructive wasteful advertising interests. In the process, shredding journalism (to which Taylor repeatedly refers to now as "churnalism") and transforming the media realm into hamster wheel (my words here, not hers) where every click is measured and logged for the science of predictive marketing. Depressing, because she is correct here -- though I do believe it's not in complete entirety and that this state is due in large part to web users themselves, who are indeed attracted to this model. Saddening, because reading this confirmed my own evolving darkened view of the web, as once I had so much faith in the power of the networked web. Taylor chronicles the obscenity of pay-per-click, the wasted resources (in both money and carbon). Even noting the irony that it was government that created these modern marvels, only to witness now private corporate entities siphon all the goodness in erecting their media empires and their quest to swallow all. That this unethical conflict of interest and crass commercialism reigns in the online realm, where it be considered offensive anywhere else. In the meantime, she questions whether this is a good arrangement for creative workers, who now are relegated to compete in a winner-take-all lottery, with no security, and most not making even enough to live on. Here, it's personal for Taylor -- while she strives to adopt an objective mantle, her experiential background surfaces again and again.

Taylor, like a lot of creative professionals, feels like she can belong to neither side in the digital rights battles -- that both sides error egregiously, both the media company overlords and the "everything should be free" crowd.

Knocking off a star because the text is repetitive and redundant in driving home her points, even if she conducts her take in a lustered fashion. Also, while recognizing the government creation, I didn't see any mention that most of the tools used to create and publish web "creative" products are the result of those free software loving hippies. Yes, it's acknowledged that a good number of F/OSS (Free/Open Source Software) developers are in the employ of for-profit corporations, so that they can put bread on the table. Though it can't be stressed enough that most of the new media prophets wane eloquently on the greatness of the new age, but yet still draw their livelihood from traditional employers, a future that's growing increasingly impossible for many educated and talented young (and older too) creative workers, due to this "creative destruction" hailed by such luminaries.

Some other qualms I have with her arguments (and remedy proposals):

* **Failure to distinguish between *text* and *media* (audio or video).** Especially in the matter of digital rights. Yes, this meanders into "the power of plain text", technical details of encoding scheme ownership, etc. But it is an important distinction.

* **Failure to promote the power of existing state of internet publishing.** I don't discount the criticism proffered by Taylor in transforming the open net into a click farm and even believe the moniker of "digital sharecropper" is apropos. But, consider that it is so wondrous and such a marvel that in the 21C you have the power to publish a creative work that *anyone* across the *globe* (with an internet connection) can read (or listen or view). Because, in large part, due to Tim Berners-Lee great vision. And all of those F/OSS hippies who contributed tools such as Apache web server, the WordPress blogging platform, etc...

* **20C solutions to a 21C problem.** Really need to think outside of the box here, as 20C solutions (Taylor references past initiatives that created public broadcasting, FCC stipulations on serving "public interest", some copyright law fiddling with ponying up more money for longer copyright, software patent reform, etc.) Taylor cites European nation measures to deal with some of these issues, but still, we need to think bigger here.

But nevertheless, this is essential reading for anyone interested or concerned with where we are headed with the internet. It's a conversation that must be conducted.

[Erhardt Graeff · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is not about designing "a people's platform." This book is a critique of the state of the media and internet technology industry, which often uses "for the people" style rhetoric to justify its profit-seeking and control-oriented design decisions. The socio-technical system of our current media ecosystem is not "open" or "democratic" or "free" in real terms; tech entrepreneurs and pundits are selling investors, consumers, and policymakers on a disingenuous vision of the future of cultural production. We may all have better access to the means of production now, but new elites own the means and modes of distribution—and that is where the political and economic value now lies.

Astra Taylor is at her best in this book when she is critiquing the media and internet industries as a content creator. As a documentary filmmaker and savvy storyteller of her own and her friends' cases, she successfully humanizes what the free culture movement as a philosophy and business strategy has meant for creators. These are people who have worked hard to maintain editorial independence from corporate commissions, branding, big labels, etc. They have a progressive politics that is often in resonance with the core ideas of free culture regarding shared ownership of cultural goods and even an anti-institutional flare. But when big companies adopt this same rhetoric, they are doing so to sell advertising against the free culture on their platforms, leaving little or nothing for the creators.

The system makes more money for mainstream artists but the long tail just means that all the independent things are free too, without the economies of scale offered by Vevo Music Videos on YouTube or record sales driven by Spotify plays. Filmmakers, musicians, and journalists are all suffering from this in ways that are waved away because anyone COULD make it big, go viral, etc. They can be their own personal brand and through hard work, make a living. But, ironically, it's harder than ever to make a living. The philosophy suggest that those who love to make culture should we content doing so without payment.

Unfortunately, a lot of this terrain is familiar. Taylor goes through much of the key ideas and books that either booster or criticize the internet's potential for more, better, and freer exchange of culture and ideas. Her summaries help establish her legitimacy entering this space—she knows the literature. But the "he said this" and "he said that" is across such a broad array of issues and areas that her core argument gets lost in the middle of the book as she tries to connect the dots and touch everything relevant.

Finally, I wish the suggestions in the end for addressing the problems were more concrete and less hand-wavy. The title and subtitle suggest a radical proposal for democratic technology is forthcoming, but it's not there. As a primer for like-minded activists and culture creators, this book could be very useful. But the audience of scholars embedded in this space will have to search for the nuggets of helpful new perspectives and arguments amidst a lot of rehashed summaries of Clay Shirky and Nicholas Carr.

Glad it was written, her voice is important, but it left me wanting.

[Magdelanye · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Internet, though open to all, is hardly an egalitarian or non-commercial paradise, even if you bracketed out all the porn and shopping sites....Writers often fall into two camps, cheerleaders of progress at any cost and the prophets of doom. from the preface p4
Though we are drowning in data, we actually know less and less about what is happening....What we don't know can and does hurt us....p81

Not quite a decade after its publication, the surprise is not that this book is severely dated but that much of what worried Astra Taylor back then is still a growing concern.

The commercial pressure, corporate corruption, government distortions and celebrity scandals contort our public discourse. p89
We are being sorted into 'reputation silos' that can be surprisingly difficult to get out of, labeled as either targets or waste, segmented down...and steered accordingly. p190
It was supposed to liberate users but instead facilitated all invasive and government surveillance. p231

These are a few of the things Astra Taylor concluded as she did her homework, and while she does not feel obliged to be be utterly consistent in her views, she does provide an extensive list of references. It doesn't really matter that numbers have likely changed, as maybe even a few of the rules. AT takes a critical look at copyright and "open" forums. She pinpoints the beginning of a major shift that occurred when television "colonized living rooms around the world" and she has something to say about stealth marketing and sponsored conversations that we need to pay attention. She rounds up opinions from all sides and allows direct expression. I found one quote from a former software coder for facebook particularly sad.
"The best minds of my generation are thinking about how to make people click ads. That sucks." p30

Here is somewhere I think we can all agree.

I may not appreciate some of her plentiful suggestions or understand all of her reasoning, but we are on the same platform, moving in the same direction. It will be interesting to catch up on her ever evolving records.

Why worry about selling out when you are already an ad and have been your whole life? Why fret about the ethics of selling yourself when you are already being used to promote somebody else? p209

[Jeremy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reading the peoples platform was a bit of an eye opener for me .. I always considered myself a tech savy person however this book gives a detailed overview of how our internet culture and tech toys have touched all industries.After completing the book I'm not sure we are in a better place or will be .Makes one stop and take a long hard look around at this Cyberspace Wild Wild West.
This is a must read for everyone.

[Aaron Arnold · Rating 3 out of 5]

When it comes to the production, distribution, and consumption of information, is the Internet a good thing, a bad thing, or just a different thing? In some ways, the Internet allows small producers to make a living while allowing for greater consumer choice; in other ways, it allows big producers to become ever more dominant, while quietly reducing the number of options consumers have. Everyone agrees that the Internet has dramatically changed the ways that businesses operate and content is created, yet the forces of centralization and monopolization continue to exert themselves in very familiar ways. The impact of the Internet on professions such as journalist, filmmaker, or author is extremely visible, yet it's surprisingly difficult to quantify exactly what happens to workers in those fields, much less find well-reasoned analyses of how to mitigate or ameliorate these tectonic shifts.

This is one of those works that's primarily negative, in that its critiques of existing attitudes towards its subject are much clearer than its "solutions". In this case, the effects that digital sharing technologies have had on existing high-tech industries have been subject to a lot of discussion but no clear proscriptions have emerged. Commentators like Clay Shirky have made lucrative careers for themselves as cheerleaders for the forces of "disruption", that ubiquitous buzzword that's usually wielded by people who aren't being disrupted - Taylor wants the reader to step back and consider the distributional impact of sharing technologies. A recurring theme is the ability of disruptive technologies to topple one existing power structure, at the (usually hidden) cost of entrenching a new one. An example is a company like Amazon and its battles with book publishers over royalties and pricing structures; who wins here - Amazon, publishers, authors, or readers? What about taxi companies vs Uber? Taylor Swift vs her record label vs Spotify? Everyone cheers when an old monopoly is toppled, but often a new monopoly is constructed, just one level off in the food chain.

The Taylor Swift analogy is probably the most relevant, since Taylor is most concerned with the economics of production. Does the existence of Spotify help or hurt Taylor Swift? Should audiences be on the side of the new distribution channels (whatever that means), the record companies, or simply the artists? Are artists like Taylor Swift better off with Spotify, traditional record labels, or some combination of the two? How about the next Taylor Swift, who is living in her shade, so to speak? The Internet famously facilitates "long tails", which allows for otherwise niche or marginal producers to find a voice and an audience. However, it also allows for network effects to exert their power as well, reinforcing the momentary ubiquity of Taylor Swift. Another famous example is the "Charlie bit my finger" video, which racked up huge numbers of hits on its way to becoming the most-viewed video of all time. This could be considered a triumph of the democratizing power of the Internet; unfortunately, for every truly viral video such as that one there are legions of more traditional corporate products, and today the list is thoroughly dominated by music videos, though "Charlie bit my finger" is still a top contender.

All of this is noteworthy. However, one prominent weakness of the book, aside from its paucity of solutions other than the expected vague outlines of motions towards copyright reform or general calls for more regulation, is that at times it feels like Taylor is just asking too much out of the Internet (a similar problem affected Tim Wu's otherwise thoughtful The Master Switch). If the Internet is just a platform, then blaming it for monopolies that use it is like blaming the ocean for the dominance of the Greek shipping industry, or blaming the electromagnetic spectrum for the Big Three TV studios in the pre-cable era. Additionally, in many ways it's hard to see how regulation, no matter how well-designed, would necessarily ameliorate the downsides of disruption - net neutrality might help companies like Netflix fight Comcast's attempts to charge it more for using so much bandwidth (and whether Netflix is actually in the right to demand that it be treated the same as anyone is of course an open question), but it doesn't help Hulu or Amazon Prime fight Netflix. Regulation is complicated, and in the case of media companies, which can simultaneously occupy several places in the chain of production and distribution, great care should be taken to avoid inadvertently stifling competition under the guise of assisting it.

Though Jean Tirole's reception of the 2014 Economics Nobel occurred after this book was published, his work on two-sided markets, particularly in the telecom field, would have given this book some more rigor. Her criticisms of claims that the Internet is inherently democratizing are on point, even if it's hard to tell from this book what the best way to resolve that issue might be. It seems like Taylor's heart is in the right place in terms of hoping for a more equitable distribution of power in these newly networked fields, but her work, though thoughtful, doesn't do much to get us there.

[Astrid · Rating 3 out of 5]

One part from this chapter that really struck me was about the notion that the digital revolution is a turn to a better, more egalitarian, greener world. In here the author uses the comparison of e-book versus printed book. On page 181 she wrote that the New York Times evaluated the environmental impact on an e-reader from the manufacturing, transportation, operation and disposal that consume the resources equal to fifty books compare to regular books! And all this time we thought that we are being green and helping to save trees by reading digitally. I am an avid reader who still buy books every month and I do not own any e-reader although I must admit, there are times when I am tempted to. But strangely, not because I want to have it, but because I thought that maybe reading electronically will save trees. So it was more towards a guilty feeling. I tried reading from an e-reader and I just can't enjoy it. I can read short articles or news from the device, but I can never finish one whole book, which is unusual for someone who can devour thick books. But now that I re-think about my reading habit, where 85% of my books are used books, and by reading Taylor’s explanation about how resilient printed books are, so I can keep my favourite books for years, write on them, study them and go back to them in years to come, that gives me a relief. This is a wonderful book for those of you who love gadgets but don't want to be enslave by it. Our mountains of e-waste grow three times faster than the piles of regular garbage because of electronic products "designed for the dump" that only lasts for two years. So think before you re-buy your gadgets.

[Jenny Thompson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I thought this was a very interesting book. I certainly found myself blogging about it and recording quotes while I read more than I normally do. For those of you unfamiliar with the text, Astra Taylor used each chapter of her book to start a conversation about potential concerns about the current media landscape. The work was incredibly well researched.

The aspect I appreciated the most was the way Taylor made me think about things I had not really thought about before. For instance, she points out the increased personalization of experience on the web leads to echo chambers. Sites learn what we like, and then they just give us that. For obvious reasons, this is not ideal.

This book was assigned reading for a class, which was interesting because Taylor directly criticizes many of the authors we have already read. In many ways, I value her perspective more because she is not a lawyer, academic, or consultant. She is an actual media creator (particularly documentary films) outside of just writing this book. Nevertheless, I would be incredibly interested to read rebuttals or reactions from figures like Shirky or Lessig.

[May-Ling · Rating 5 out of 5]

well-researched, smart book about the intersection between technology and culture (society and art) in today's age. taylor does a brilliant job of unveiling effects of tech, both what's happening and cautionary tales for the future. she has a clear perspective, yet lays out such a logical and well thought out argument that's hard to disagree with. rarely has a book made me think so much about issues of our time and caused me to ponder my own role in our changing future.

the people's platform is not a page turner. an avid reader, i usually tear through books within a week or so and this one took me months. taylor's writing is on point and she doesn't waste a word. the vocabulary she uses and editing out unnecessary text leave you with efficient writing. this means each sentence truly says something meaningful and that takes time to process. the subject matter can be tough to return to, as it focuses on problems.

i'm so glad i read this important work. anyone concerned about arts and culture, rights, privacy and/or digital technologies should pick this one up!

[Uwe Hook · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is filled with so many research-based insights and simple common sense about the effect of the Internet on our lives, I cannot recommend it highly enough Among one of my favorites, "Networks do not eradicate power, they distribute it in different ways, shuffling hierarchies and producing new mechanisms of exclusion."

If you are still taking seriously any of the humanitarian concerns voiced by the Silicon Valley crowd, please read this book because it points out that an Internet born in a time of economic exploitation similar to the kind that was rampant in the late nineteenth century's Gilded Age is bound to reflect the concerns of its social context. It was not born and does not exist in a vacuum, so that means those of us who love it--or even those who hate it--need to figure out ways to pursue its pleasures and opportunities without becoming economic and social slaves to its reach and control.

[Robert G. Paul · Rating 2 out of 5]

Some very interesting information is contained in this book, some of which I found very enlightening. However, I found myself getting bored and distracted very early in the book. It was too wordy and could have been condensed to less than half the size without compromising the overall integrity of the content. This was a very hard read and a major task to complete. I also didn't appreciate the few cuss words included as part of the vocabulary. Was this really necessary?

[Ahmad Alkadri · Rating 5 out of 5]

Bacaan yang sangat bagus untuk semua orang yang tertarik pada bidang teknologi, internet, informasi, dan hubungan mereka semua dengan faktor-faktor sosial-ekonomi dan privasi masyarakat.

[Alex Mader · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good book. Lots of excellent referneces. Well written and engaging.

[Chris Branch · Rating 3 out of 5]

Since this book was published in 2014, I have to give Taylor credit for being ahead of the crowd in raising concerns about the attention economy, the advertising model of the internet, and the general direction that things are heading as far as online content and interaction. These are matters that I only became aware of more recently, due to commentary from Tristan Harris and others, so it’s clear that this book was an early voice on the topic.

Taylor is an impassioned and insightful writer, clearly describing the problems in ways that should concern us all. She also comes across as angry and disgusted with the current state of affairs, which is certainly understandable, although I’m not sure it’s the best way to capture the interest of readers. More importantly, although the message is that society can do better, concrete ideas for exactly how to do better are lacking here.

There’s plenty of discussion of the difficulties we face, including that “Institutions will try to preserve the problem to which they are the solution” (p. 46), the dilemma between overly strict copyright laws and the problem of piracy (p. 170) and the obnoxious requirement to create a “personal brand” in order to succeed (p. 207).

I’m with her on pretty much all of these issues, but there’s not much in the way of proposed solutions until the concluding chapter. There, she gestures at the fact that “there are many areas we strive to at least partially shield from capitalism’s excesses, such as scientific research, health, and education.” (p. 219), implying that the government should play a role in more areas of the online world. More explicitly, she points out that “a growing chorus of technologists and critics argues that both the service providers and the most popular platforms should be regulated as public utilities.” (p. 224). She also suggests that tech firms could pay higher taxes, and that a “portion of these funds could be earmarked to underwrite and promote art, culture, and journalism.” (p. 229)

These are promising ideas, but there are too few of them in the book, much of which is devoted instead to trying to provoke the readers’ outrage at the problems. A valiant cause, and maybe in 2014 no one else was doing this. Now, however, we’ve recognized the problems and we need to get to work on finding and implementing the solutions.

[Don · Rating 5 out of 5]

The second great book in a row I've read about understanding the impact of various new technologies of the "digital age." The prior book, "The Shallows," really focuses narrowly on the impact had on our neurology - our thinking, our memory, our mindfulness. In this book, Taylor gives a much more expansive and encompassing look at the impact.

She discusses it from the perspective of "old media" versus "new media," from politics and psychology, to economics, sociology, culture, and environmentalism. Similar to "The Shallows," she establishes that so many of these swift changes have occurred with little thought as to the impact it would have; though at times she argues persuasively that society was sold a bill of goods as to the impact, but ultimately got a raw deal.

While she makes convincing, and timely, arguments about the often disastrous economic impact of the new digital media, the lasting impact for me from Taylor's work is the discussion of environmentalism. She very effectively broadens the scope and shows why the contentions that the digital age were an improvement for the environment (we all use less paper, right?), are very much false. Reading it, and reflecting it, gives me pause on my own use of technology - not from the perspective of how it impacts me (which is what reading "The Shallows" did) - but in how it impacts my world and neighbors. The consumerism culture, of which I am often guilty of succumbing too, shares much blame and responsibility for the disastrous effects on our environment.

"The Shallows" made me want to reduce how much I use technology for the sake of my own mental well-being. Taylor's work makes me want to rethink how I use and re-use technology for the sake of my society, and my world.

[Malcolm Stewart · Rating 4 out of 5]

Taylor provides many valuable insights and critiques into the problems of the digital age and, more specifically, that which is created and supported by the attention economy and those who benefit most from it. It is in this sense which Taylor’s diagnosis is quite good. But like many who have come before, with ideas undoubtedly shaped with the best of intentions, many (though perhaps not all) of the solutions and suggested means of achieving a “sustainable culture” (the creation of which I agree with in principle) fly in the face of sensibility. To quote, from page 228: “... a skeptic may still insist that these proposals for supporting sustainable culture are too costly to seriously consider. But the money for such an undertaking exists, indeed it is already being spent, but with great inefficiency.” Taylor then goes on to suggest that bureaucratic expenditure of such funds might be more efficient as an alternative, as if “bureaucracy” and “efficiency” were two concepts that are intrinsically cooperative in nature and as if received political experience doesn’t already belie the veracity of such sentiment. Therefore it is in this way that Taylor’s prescription is quite bad. The four stars I give to this work reflect the value of Taylor’s contribution to the discussion which desperately needs to be brought before a wider audience.

[Jay Cruz · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've been an Internet enthusiast ever since I got online back in the late 90's. I remember discovering bulletin boards, RSS readers, Wikipedia, and creating my first blog with Google's Blogger. It was an exciting time and everything seemed possible. But as the years have gone by, I've seen how the Internet has gone from a medium where you where encouraged to participate, to one where you just passively consume information. There are many reasons why this happened and the book tackles the many reasons why this shift has taken place. The shift for me started with the whole web 2.0 idealism and the beginning of what is dubbed now social media. While this shift made the Internet more accessible to more people, it has changed the community driven spirit of the web to a more individual driven pursuit. This is, as the book argues, one of the reasons why the Internet is starting to look more like traditional media (print, radio, television) where the bottom line is making money.

The book of course does a better job at explaining why the Internet is no longer The People's Platform, or at least on how we're loosing it to advertising and corporate interest. But it's given me hope and excited that we still can do something about it.

[Jonathan · Rating 4 out of 5]

The paeans to the democratic, utopian promise of the Internet from a few decades ago can sit at odds with what we see today. Indicting the current situation, Astra Taylor highlights "the secretive methods of many Internet companies, the feudal business model of Web 2.0, the increasingly common expectation that people work without compensation, the persistence of inequality and intolerance online, and the disastrous consequences of high-tech manufacturing techniques and the constant upgrading of still functional, but no longer fashionable, gadgets on our natural world." Fortunately, as she stresses throughout the book, there is another way: that there's still hope for democratizing the Internet, but it will require our collective decision-making to build equity into the system itself, rather than continuing to allow it to become a plaything for large corporations.

[Blaine Morrow · Rating 5 out of 5]

Taylor offers an eloquent and convincing jeremiad decrying the unfair power structure of the Web and the fallacy of open and egalitarian information- and culture- sharing. Her critique is especially effective when she considers the information and journalism industries and the plight of writers, artists, filmmakers, musicians, and similar creative professionals whose products are easily reproduced and shared without compensation via the Internet. Taylor is well-read, thoughtful, and passionate: she cites Alan Greenspan, Lawrence Lessig, Tim Wu, Tim Berners-Lee, David Brooks, Clay Shirky, Juliet Schor, Robert Reich, Germaine Greer, Diderot, Condorcet, Siva Vaidhyanathan, Cory Doctorow, and hundreds of others. Provocative and informative.

[Andrew Adams · Rating 4 out of 5]

The People's Platform criticizes the myths perpetuated by the tech industry that the internet is some open utopia, reveals it for the privatized, inegalitarian thing it actually is, and provides a vision for making it better. Approachable, nuanced, insightful, convincing. I feel a bit powerless in changing the many deep structural problems, but awareness is a good start. Well worth reading if only to encourage a more critical and thoughtful participation in the platforms and systems I use online.

[Sean Mann · Rating 5 out of 5]

Published in 2014, it says a lot about the depth of the author's research that many of her observations on the monopolization of the internet hold true today. Taylor's well-researched critiques of silicon valley, cable and ISP companies, and public policy related to information systems are even more important right now as we try to reign in the power of big tech and make the internet, and the US, a more just place.

[Adrian Fanaca · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is about a peasant's kingdom, the love of money, what we want, unequal uptake, the double anchor, drawing a line. The author also made some documentaries and is speaking a lot about the rights of artists and the freedom to consume art for free on the Internet. I do not remember anything written in this book after reading it so I give it a 3 stars (2 stars are for good religious/fake news books and 1 star for bad religious/fake news books).

[reading23 · Rating 4 out of 5]

10 years later, this book still holds up. Like many reviewers have stated, it provides the smartest, most nuanced take on digital democracy. Among its shrewdest observations, this one sticks with me: “True cultural democracy entails supporting work that not everyone will like and some may even despise – and ensuring that citizens will occasionally be exposed to things they don’t necessarily agree with or want to see. Democracy, in both its cultural and its political incarnations, depends on the contact between conflicting perspectives.”

[Evelina Galimova · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well researched. A great starting point that covers a wide range of applications if you want to jump into the intersection of tech and culture. A downer, but in my opinion, a necessary one as I believe it is crucial to know the nauseating implications of being a digital native. Dragged on a bit at times, but also dug deep enough to touch on concepts or ideas that I wouldn’t have even thought to analyze on my own.

[Ana · Rating 5 out of 5]

Is definitely one of the best writhen books about todays culture and social bases that i read in the past years. Astra bring to the table some of my concerns about social conjunction and capitalism. is fresh and is not too soft or too negative about what is happening around media, technology and survival of our own selfs.

[Jenna Spinelle · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is incredibly prescient. It was published in 2014 but predicts many of the trends we're seeing today in the media. Worth a read for a big-picture understanding of how we got here and what we can do about it.

[Brendan Ryan · Rating 5 out of 5]

I love this book and all of Astra Taylor’s writings. She’s a great columnist for the baffler. Totally righteous take On the possibilities the Internet allows and the way they’ve been hijacked by capitalism and social media. A bit dated at this point but still great.

[Matt Casey · Rating 3 out of 5]

More of a critique and analysis of what’s wrong as opposed to a way forward, despite the title’s “taking back power” claim. Still, has an insightfulness than somewhat transcends its age despite the technological subject matter.

[Marcos Fuerte · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is somewhat confusioning to understand but overall make sure you get some preview about social science. Still a great book on 2018.