Taylor subjects the “Internet famous” narrative to a particularly scathing critique. The story is familiar: An unknown artist self-produces a video, only to see it go viral and reach millions, gaining herself an interview on the “Today” show. O.K., so then what? It’s just back to serfdom (with exceptions, like E. L. James, author of “Fifty Shades of Grey,” which began as “Twilight” fan fiction). In any event, the odds of going viral are comparable to winning the lottery, but the lottery, to its credit, actually pays out in cash. You might say virality is the promise that keeps the proletariat toiling in the cultural factories, instead of revolting and asking for something better.

“The People’s Platform” has the flavor of a “Roger & Me” for the American cultural industries, and it will resonate with those in the creative classes who have seen their lives made harder by the web: writers of serious nonfiction, musicians, playwrights, novelists and investigative journalists. Combined, these make for a highly sympathetic class. But to the extent that Taylor condemns the web as generally bad for culture, the narrative is not free of complications. For one thing, her critique is far weaker for the part-timers, hobbyists and amateurs who use the web: The average Instagram user isn’t exactly trying to make a career out of selfies and may not feel particularly exploited. The web, moreover, has created more than just cheaper versions of what came before — the core sites of Internet culture, say Awkward Family Photos (which collects same), are really just categories unto themselves. The uncomfortable fact that Taylor does not highlight is that it is non-careerists as much as aggregators who are doing the damage she describes.

Absent also is the consumer qua consumer. Taylor believes we suffer from being pandered to by clickable content and a general erosion in the quality of content. But there’s more to the Internet than listicles, and when we consider ourselves as just readers or viewers the stubborn fact is that it has never been cheaper or easier to get at good stuff. Netflix and YouTube are a bonanza for lovers of obscure television and film. And while many in publishing hate Amazon with a passion once reserved for television, no one can deny that readers can nowadays buy more books for less. A full accounting cannot ignore just how accessible culture has become.

Leaving aside these complications, Taylor does force us to consider one big question: “What do we lose if we let the middle go missing?” She sees the solution in a movement toward “sustainable culture” (which, as with organic food, would presumably mean paying more for things), along with more public support for the arts. As she points out, we’ve taken to assuming that culture will just take care of itself, when that’s never been the case.

The tech industry might be tempted to dismiss Taylor’s arguments as merely a version of typewriter manufacturers’ complaints circa 1984, but that would be a mistake. “The People’s Platform” should be taken as a challenge by the new media that have long claimed to be improving on the old order. Can they prove they are capable of supporting a sustainable cultural ecosystem, in a way that goes beyond just hosting parties at the Sundance Film ­Festival?