The Cluetrain Manifesto and The Incommunicado Reader

I am reading (simultaneously) The Cluetrain Manifesto and The Incommunicado Reader. Both make me somewhat unhappy.

Cluetrain Manifesto (that is an absolutely out of date critique, but it doesn't matter), seems to assume there is only a duality human beings X corporations. How not true is this? How complicate it is to put under the same umbrella people that actually don't really like each other at all and don't want to talk to each other? Don't want to stabilish a conversation?

The incommunicado readers seems to notice this: the discourse of just separating the good from the bad. (I know I am judging, and I promise I will come back and apologize later, when I understand them better. If needed).

Information society - technology determinism?

Just a quick though, so it won't get lost: I am reading Daniel Bell's “Foreword: 1976”. The Coming of Postindustrial Society" (Nueva York: Basic Books, 1999), written in 1976, for the advanced seminar offered by UOC and OII. Anyways, the texts for this week talk a lot about the transition from industrial society to post industrial society. Gee, was there an industrial society, first of all? Isn't this a quite linear way of thinking development? Isn't it slightly too generic?

I mean, really, do societies really develop in one linear way? ... ok, back to the readings. Just had to write this somewhere...

Under pressure

You know what? Maybe I do work better under pressure. I'm not sure if this is something I would ever tell a boss, but... maybe it's true. (And I guess good bosses already knew that). :)