Piotr Czerski We, the Web Kids.

(translated by Marta Szreder) There is probably no other word that would be as overused in the edia dis!ourse as "#eneration$. % on!e tried to !ount the "#enerations$ that have been pro!lai ed in the past ten years, sin!e the well& known arti!le about the so&!alled "'eneration (othin#$) % believe there were as any as twelve. They all had one thin# in !o on* they only e+isted on paper. ,eality never provided us with a sin#le tan#ible, eanin#-ul, un-or#ettable i pulse, the !o on e+perien!e o- whi!h would -orever distin#uish us -ro the previous #enerations. We had been lookin# -or it, but instead the #roundbreakin# !han#e !a e unnoti!ed, alon# with !able T., obile phones, and, ost o- all, %nternet a!!ess. %t is only today that we !an -ully !o prehend how u!h has !han#ed durin# the past -i-teen years. We, the Web kids) we, who have #rown up with the %nternet and on the %nternet, are a #eneration who eet the !riteria -or the ter in a so ewhat subversive way. We did not e+perien!e an i pulse -ro reality, but rather a eta orphosis o- the reality itsel-. What unites us is not a !o on, li ited !ultural !onte+t, but the belie- that the !onte+t is sel-&de-ined and an e--e!t o- -ree !hoi!e. Writin# this, % a aware that % a abusin# the pronoun "we$, as our "we$ is -lu!tuatin#, dis!ontinuous, blurred, a!!ordin# to old !ate#ories* te porary. When % say "we$, it eans " any o- us$ or "so e o- us$. When % say "we are$, it eans "we o-ten are$. % say "we$ only so as to be able to talk about us at all. /. We #rew up with the %nternet and on the %nternet. This is what akes us di--erent) this is what akes the !ru!ial, althou#h surprisin# -ro your point o- view, di--eren!e* we do not "sur-$ and the internet to us is not a "pla!e$ or "virtual spa!e$. The %nternet to us is not so ethin# e+ternal to reality but a part oit* an invisible yet !onstantly present layer intertwined with the physi!al environ ent. We do not use the %nternet, we live on the %nternet and alon# it. %- we were to tell our bildun#sro an to you, the analo#, we !ould say there was a natural %nternet aspe!t to every sin#le e+perien!e that has shaped us. We ade -riends and ene ies online, we prepared !ribs -or tests online, we planned parties and studyin# sessions online, we -ell in love and broke up online. The Web to us is not a te!hnolo#y whi!h we had to learn and whi!h we ana#ed to #et a #rip o-. The Web is a pro!ess, happenin# !ontinuously and !ontinuously trans-or in# be-ore our eyes) with us and throu#h us. Te!hnolo#ies appear and then dissolve in the peripheries, websites are built, they bloo and then pass away, but the Web !ontinues, be!ause we are the Web) we, !o uni!atin# with one another in a way that !o es naturally to us, ore intense and ore e--i!ient than ever be-ore in the history o- ankind. 0rou#ht up on the Web we think di--erently. The ability to -ind in-or ation is to us so ethin# as basi!, as the ability to -ind a railway station or a post o--i!e in an unknown !ity is to you. When we want to know so ethin# & the -irst sy pto s o- !hi!kenpo+, the reasons behind the sinkin# o- "1stonia$, or whether the water bill is not suspi!iously hi#h & we take easures with the !ertainty o- a driver in a Sat(av&e2uipped !ar. We know that we are #oin# to -ind the in-or ation we need in a lot o- pla!es, we know how to #et to those pla!es, we know how to assess their !redibility. We have learned to a!!ept that instead o- one answer we -ind any di--erent ones, and out o- these we !an abstra!t the ost likely version, disre#ardin# the ones whi!h do not see !redible. We sele!t, we -ilter, we re e ber, and we are ready to swap the learned in-or ation -or a new, better one, when it !o es alon#. To us, the Web is a sort o- shared e+ternal e ory. We do not have to re e ber unne!essary details* dates, su s, -or ulas, !lauses, street na es, detailed de-initions. %t is enou#h -or us to have an abstra!t, the essen!e that is needed to pro!ess the in-or ation and relate it to others. Should we

need the details, we !an look the up within se!onds. Si ilarly, we do not have to be e+perts in everythin#, be!ause we know where to -ind people who spe!ialize in what we ourselves do not know, and who we !an trust. People who will share their e+pertise with us not -or pro-it, but be!ause o- our shared belie- that in-or ation e+ists in otion, that it wants to be -ree, that we all bene-it -ro the e+!han#e o- in-or ation. 1very day* studyin#, workin#, solvin# everyday issues, pursuin# interests. We know how to !o pete and we like to do it, but our !o petition, our desire to be di--erent, is built on knowled#e, on the ability to interpret and pro!ess in-or ation, and not on onopolizin# it. 3. Parti!ipatin# in !ultural li-e is not so ethin# out o- ordinary to us* #lobal !ulture is the -unda ental buildin# blo!k o- our identity, ore i portant -or de-inin# ourselves than traditions, histori!al narratives, so!ial status, an!estry, or even the lan#ua#e that we use. 4ro the o!ean o- !ultural events we pi!k the ones that suit us the ost) we intera!t with the , we review the , we save our reviews on websites !reated -or that purpose, whi!h also #ive us su##estions o- other albu s, -il s or #a es that we i#ht like. So e -il s, series or videos we wat!h to#ether with !ollea#ues or with -riends -ro around the world) our appre!iation o- so e is only shared by a s all #roup o- people that perhaps we will never eet -a!e to -a!e. This is why we -eel that !ulture is be!o in# si ultaneously #lobal and individual. This is why we need -ree a!!ess to it. This does not ean that we de and that all produ!ts o- !ulture be available to us without !har#e, althou#h when we !reate so ethin#, we usually 5ust #ive it ba!k -or !ir!ulation. We understand that, despite the in!reasin# a!!essibility o- te!hnolo#ies whi!h ake the 2uality o- ovie or sound -iles so -ar reserved -or pro-essionals available to everyone, !reativity re2uires e--ort and invest ent. We are prepared to pay, but the #iant !o ission that distributors ask -or see s to us to be obviously overesti ated. Why should we pay -or the distribution o- in-or ation that !an be easily and per-e!tly !opied without any loss o- the ori#inal 2uality6 %- we are only #ettin# the in-or ation alone, we want the pri!e to be proportional to it. We are willin# to pay ore, but then we e+pe!t to re!eive so e added value* an interestin# pa!ka#in#, a #ad#et, a hi#her 2uality, the option o- wat!hin# here and now, without waitin# -or the -ile to download. We are !apable o- showin# appre!iation and we do want to reward the artist (sin!e oney stopped bein# paper notes and be!a e a strin# o- nu bers on the s!reen, payin# has be!o e a so ewhat sy boli! a!t o- e+!han#e that is supposed to bene-it both parties), but the sales #oals o- !orporations are o- no interest to us whatsoever. %t is not our -ault that their business has !eased to ake sense in its traditional -or , and that instead o- a!!eptin# the !hallen#e and tryin# to rea!h us with so ethin# ore than we !an #et -or -ree they have de!ided to de-end their obsolete ways. 7ne ore thin#* we do not want to pay -or our e ories. The -il s that re ind us o- our !hildhood, the usi! that a!!o panied us ten years a#o* in the e+ternal e ory network these are si ply e ories. ,e e berin# the , e+!han#in# the , and developin# the is to us so ethin# as natural as the e ory o- "Casablan!a$ is to you. We -ind online the -il s that we wat!hed as !hildren and we show the to our !hildren, 5ust as you told us the story about the 8ittle ,ed ,idin# 9ood or 'oldilo!ks. Can you i a#ine that so eone !ould a!!use you o- breakin# the law in this way6 We !annot, either. :. We are used to our bills bein# paid auto ati!ally, as lon# as our a!!ount balan!e allows -or it) we know that startin# a bank a!!ount or !han#in# the obile network is 5ust the 2uestion o- -illin# in a sin#le -or online and si#nin# an a#ree ent delivered by a !ourier) that even a trip to the other side o1urope with a short si#htseein# o- another !ity on the way !an be or#anized in two hours. Conse2uently, bein# the users o- the state, we are in!reasin#ly annoyed by its ar!hai! inter-a!e. We do not understand why ta+ a!t takes several -or s to !o plete, the ain o- whi!h has ore than a hundred 2uestions. We do not understand why we are re2uired to -or ally !on-ir ovin# out o- one

per anent address to ove in to another, as i- !oun!ils !ould not !o uni!ate with ea!h other without our intervention (not to ention that the ne!essity to have a per anent address is itsel- absurd enou#h.) There is not a tra!e in us o- that hu ble a!!eptan!e displayed by our parents, who were !onvin!ed that ad inistrative issues were o- ut ost i portan!e and who !onsidered intera!tion with the state as so ethin# to be !elebrated. We do not -eel that respe!t, rooted in the distan!e between the lonely !itizen and the a5esti! hei#hts where the rulin# !lass reside, barely visible throu#h the !louds. 7ur view o- the so!ial stru!ture is di--erent -ro yours* so!iety is a network, not a hierar!hy. We are used to bein# able to start a dialo#ue with anyone, be it a pro-essor or a pop star, and we do not need any spe!ial 2uali-i!ations related to so!ial status. The su!!ess o- the intera!tion depends solely on whether the !ontent o- our essa#e will be re#arded as i portant and worthy o- reply. ;nd i-, thanks to !ooperation, !ontinuous dispute, de-endin# our ar#u ents a#ainst !riti2ue, we have a -eelin# that our opinions on any atters are si ply better, why would we not e+pe!t a serious dialo#ue with the #overn ent6 We do not -eel a reli#ious respe!t -or "institutions o- de o!ra!y$ in their !urrent -or , we do not believe in their a+io ati! role, as do those who see "institutions o- de o!ra!y$ as a onu ent -or and by the selves. We do not need onu ents. We need a syste that will live up to our e+pe!tations, a syste that is transparent and pro-i!ient. ;nd we have learned that !han#e is possible* that every un!o -ortable syste !an be repla!ed and is repla!ed by a new one, one that is ore e--i!ient, better suited to our needs, #ivin# ore opportunities. What we value the ost is -reedo * -reedo o- spee!h, -reedo o- a!!ess to in-or ation and to !ulture. We -eel that it is thanks to -reedo that the Web is what it is, and that it is our duty to prote!t that -reedo . We owe that to ne+t #enerations, 5ust as u!h as we owe to prote!t the environ ent. Perhaps we have not yet #iven it a na e, perhaps we are not yet -ully aware o- it, but % #uess what we want is real, #enuine de o!ra!y. <e o!ra!y that, perhaps, is ore than is drea ed o- in your 5ournalis .