Nitpicking Jenkins?

Let me be clear. I thought Jenkins was fun to read. It was the easiest to read among all the readings we had to do this semester so far (well, Rheingold too). But I see so many gaps in his arguments that it's hard not to talk about them.
So my first discontent would be...his refusal of seeing digital divide or "access to technology" as an economic gap between cultures and countries. He seems to think that participation gap would be overcome once the "cultural factors" that prohibit different groups from paticipating would be confronted. However, these cultural factors that Jenkins talks about is deeply rooted in the economic gap between different groups of people and culture as well and I find it problematic that Jenkins argues that the "cultural factors that diminish the likelihood that different groups will participate" can be overcome merely through public education. This seems to be the kind of argument that privileged people with "cultural capital" (scholars such as Jenkins) would be saying.

My second problem with Jenkins' arguments may be an extension of my first problem. He seems to argue that participatory culture is democratic because people get to be involved in the process of production and distribution of cultural products, which is a very populist message. However, for one to participate, a certain amount of knowledge and access to technology are prerequisite. Even Jenkins admits that people of participatory culture (for now) are mostly white, middle-upper class, men. Then, how can this be a democratic process if certain people becomes excluded (for economic, cultural, and social factors) in the participatory culture? Would it be a far stretch if I say that Jenkins seems to believe that those who engage in participatory culture are better citizens (ahem...I mean, consumers) than those who don't?

Another paradox in his argument about the democratic characteristic of particpatory culture and knowledge community. Jenkins does acknowledge that some people have more access to information and knowledge ("brain trust") which makes them experts in certain fields. However, he seems to see these experts functioning outside of the knowledge community. I think he tends to dismiss the idea that hierarchy (in terms of possession of knowledge, access to technology, etc.) exists even within the knowledge community (okay, he does acknowledge that some people are more "experts" than others and when people like ChillOne and others participate as "experts" it threatens the "more open-ended and democratic principles upon which a collective intelligence operates" (p. 54) but he still argues these experts are needed for the fun of "spoiling" to continue in the community) when it is clear that experts emerge within this community. When experts emerge in the community, the non-expert participants begin to rely on these experts for their knowledge and pleasure (of course, non-experts' trust that experts will deliver their needs has to established first). Doesn't reliance on experts contradict to the "equal participation, equal responsibility, etc." principle of democracy? Or am I reading too much out of nothing?

Another thing that Jenkins makes his argument confusing is his labelling of McChesney and others as "pessimists" because they are focused more on what the media do to people than what people do to media. It seems like a fair argument but I'm just wondering whether Jenkins and McChesney et.al are focusing on the same matter. Whereas Jenkins's focus is in the "content layer" of communication, McChesney et. al's focus is on the "physical" (and also "code") layer of communication (their concern is how the monopolization of the physical and code layer of communication influences the content layer of communication). I think it is possible that people can have an influence on the content layer of communication but if the physical and code layer are controlled by media conglomerates how much of an impact can people's participation have? Even the Star Wars spoofs, culture jamming tactics, etc. that try to subvert the media conglomerate's content layer seem to get controlled by the media giants.

I have more to write on what I got from Jenkins...such as redefinition of leisure, comparison with Lessig's argument, and the possible future of democracy after training to become a better citizen through pop culture. I will post these after class.
Sorry if my arguments seem like nonsense. I'm confused myself.