Countering Commoditization
The moment we start taking technology for granted, we risk stifling future innovation and creativity.
As a musician, I’ve long been interested in the impact of commoditization on parts of life that should not be subject to simple (or complex) rules of economics. The moment music was digitized and freely shared, something changed. The value of recorded music started to erode. For a time, the awe and wonder of having 10,000 tunes in your pocket buoyed the music industry, which scrambled to clamp down on illegal music sharing services. Today, companies such as Spotify grant unlimited access to music on a (low cost) subscription basis. Other media faces a similar situation. Simply put, creative content is no longer scarce, and its value has been diminished accordingly. Why spend $10 on a Blu-ray disc or CD – or a downloaded copy for that matter – when you can spend the same amount on unlimited high-definition or high-fidelity streamed content from a “service” provider. Of course, new releases still garner interest, but as profits erode, how will it affect the creative process – or innovation?
Luckily, from a musical perspective, live performances are the new “premium” content – after all, you can’t digitize an experience... yet. Clearly, we do recognize value in certain aspects of music...
Yesterday, I spoke at length with John Yates – a proteomics pioneer based at The Scripps Research Institute (if you didn’t see our first Power List). We touched upon the demise in recognition for the importance of proteomics and mass spectrometry – the essential workhorse technology – in certain studies. Why, he asked, are certain technologies or techniques openly acknowledged in research papers when others are not? The answer is perhaps commoditization. To quote Wikipedia (commoditized knowledge anyone?): “Commoditization is defined as the process by which goods that have economic value and are distinguishable in terms of attributes (uniqueness or brand) end up becoming simple commodities in the eyes of the market or consumers.” Though it seems strange that this should or could happen to a field that is by no means mature, John clearly recognizes a problem and is fearful that the lack of recognition for proteomics could send it on a downward spiral from a funding perspective.
Look out for a feature on the life and work of John Yates in an upcoming issue. In the meantime, may I suggest that we reconsider treating technology, techniques, processes – and creativity – as commodities and give them the recognition that they deserve, lest we stifle the next generation of pioneers?
Rich Whitworth completed his studies in medical biochemistry at the University of Leicester, UK, in 1998. To cut a long story short, he escaped to Tokyo to spend five years working for the largest English language publisher in Japan. "Carving out a career in the megalopolis that is Tokyo changed my outlook forever. When seeing life through such a kaleidoscopic lens, it's hard not to get truly caught up in the moment." On returning to the UK, after a few false starts with grey, corporate publishers, Rich was snapped up by Texere Publishing, where he spearheaded the editorial development of The Analytical Scientist. "I feel honored to be part of the close-knit team that forged The Analytical Scientist – we've created a very fresh and forward-thinking publication." Rich is now also Content Director of Texere Publishing, the company behind The Analytical Scientist.
