As an old broadcast guy, I’m fully capable of droning on about bandwidth.
Bandwidth essentially can be defined as the amount of data that can be carried from one point to another in a given period of time.
In the mid-1980s, while I was studying radio, television and film in college and graduate school, virtually everything boiled down to a question of bandwidth — not surprising considering that the old information order dominated by print and broadcast media was seriously plagued by bandwidth limitations.
Way back then, print and broadcast media were the primary ways through which people could communicate with large numbers of other people.
My task as a broadcast student was learning the most optimal ways to push information through this comparatively constricted bandwidth to the masses — needless to say, the same challenge facing my print counterparts who were training to become journalists.
We essentially were being trained to become dissemination experts — people who knew how to take large amounts of information, winnow it down and present it ways that made optimal use of limited bandwidth.
For that matter, so were aspiring educators of the time.
Looking back, it was a bit of a heavy experience, and while I’m by no means the product of an elite education, I admit succumbing once or twice to the feeling that I was preparing myself for a lofty role.
So much has changed in the last quarter century. Indeed, if you think about it, with the advent of the Internet and, more recently, Web 2.0, the bandwidth issue has been all but resolved.
To a degree, I saw these changes coming. Somehow, I had stumbled onto and zealously read the works of futurist Alvin Toffler way back in the early 80s. Toffler offered a compelling argument that the mass media-dominated information order in which I was being trained ultimately would be replaced by one that was considerably more demassified and open.
The massive expansion of communications outlets that would follow this demassification would empower large numbers of people to become communicators on their own.
That’s precisely what has happened. As I’ve related before within this forum, I first noticed it in the mid-1990s after surfing onto the pages of Jim, a Brooklyn attorney and independent scholar who used his knowledge of UNIX and html to develop one of the most comprehensive and influential political sites on the internet.
There is an important lesson here for Extension educators.
We’ve got to understand how this new communications order has transformed our diverse audiences. Growing numbers of them are no longer clients in any conventional sense of the word.
They are no longer clients, no longer consumers but prosumers who will actively collaborate with us in the planning, development and delivery of our knowledge products.
They have liberated themselves in ways we professional communicators and educators could have scarcely imagined a generation ago.
To a significant degree, they are now our equals, people who are fully capable of using the advantages of these new media to learn on their own and empower themselves.
They no longer need dissemination experts like me.
Small wonder why the old plan-and-push communications and outreach model is as dead as a door nail.
It largely accounts for why we in Extension must become comfortable with platforms, the fluid ecosystems in which ideas are discussed and exchanged and that serve as the bases for supporting present and future innovation.
The platforms of the future will be characterized by the active collaboration of Extension educators and clients — or, I should say, former clients.
Building these sorts of platforms and actively collaborating with our former clients will ensure that we remain in the 21st century what we were in the 20th: educators at the cusp of innovation and change.