wikipedia; digital values for dynamic platforms.
After reading the responses to Digital Maoism, I have a few conflicting feelings.
On one hand I feel that the argument concerning the “medium” of the internet should be retired. I feel like some of these projects (open source as well as larger social media projects) while each have shortcommings of a traditionally kept media product, have inherient tendancies tied to the structure of the platform. This structure is independent of say, another system of a simmilar product, and by this, has slightly different tendancies and results. So the struce of the media-wiki script (the underlying software behind wikipedia that manages the process for pages and edits) gives wikipedia certain characteristics that many people associate with the hivemind, rather than the structure of wikipedia as a platform.
ok, a less wordy example. For example, personally I have noticed with Facebook, through structuring the interaction, through semantics, placeement, ect, some parts of the site carry more “weight” socaily, which I would argue is structed within the platform. So for example “friending someone is unacceptable unless you have a good reason and regualar of significant contact with that person. However, Facebook has not focused on upping the ante on “invitations” which are largely meaningless, people people missreporting their RSVP information or inviting less familar people. It is a platform which has construted its own social norms, and the platform of creating articles.
So while the argument of can a group of people create great cultural products I think is somewhat pointless. Something such as Mac OS X proves that sometimes it is better for a product to be a fully realized experience, but that does not discredit the purpose of Linux exsisting. While it may seem they are in competeing spaces, they both have completely different purposes in the world, and we need to accept that there are inherint structual differences in creating each which effect how each is fully realized.
With this being said, there can always be improvements within Wikipedia to build imporatance to different features. The platform was built with “anyone can edit” as the number one priority; they chose this to be more importantly displayed than the discussion around each article, the debate that takes place behind the scenes.
There is a correct balence, but as media scholars, we need to work out what things need to be impressed on a platform, and decide what is important to us in a media platform
For today’s class: Wikiality
It was mentioned before, but should be discussed in class today:
My Response to Shirky
Quick recap of my understanding of Shirky’s response:Though Shirky agrees with Lanier that there is a need to look at the downsides of collective action, he feels that Lanier mischaracterizes the present situation. Specifically, Lanier does not consider thoroughly the details that are involved in allowing Wikipedia to operate. There is more to Wikipedia than just the misconception of everyone having the same power as creators of content:
“the truth of the matter is that a small group of participants design and enforce editorial policy through mechanisms like the Talk pages, lock protection, article inclusion voting, mailing lists, and so on. Furthermore, proposed edits are highly dependant on individual reputation — anonymous additions or alterations are subjected to a higher degree of both scrutiny and control, while the reputation of known contributors is publicly discussed on the Talk pages.â€
Travelogue interventions through the brake & the Cult of Wikipedia
Hi Class,
Next week we’re braking but we’ll be back in two weeks with much more development on your travelogues and a serious critique of Wikipedia.
The main goal of your travelogues over these coming two weeks will be:
- Define the nature and social norms of the media environment you are traveling through
- Try to study and expose to us previous interventions in the environment, were they led by individuals? (Google Adwords Happening) by groups? (WoW Funeral Raid) or by those in control of the environment itself? (ebay’s change of terms)
- Try to asses what type of intervention would help you better understand the environment, or maybe even make that environment better understand itself. Maybe your experiment will even change the nature of the environment or disrupt it in an illuminating sense.
- Start your intervention, if it fits, let us know about it.
Recommended Reading:
- Jaron Lanier - Digital Maoism
Required reading / watching:
- Choose one of the responses to Jaron Lanier’s Digital Maoism
- Write your own response to the response
- Watch the very short film from (good old) Adam Curtis - The Rise and Fall of the TV Journalist
For Karina:
- Read the article and watch the short film
- Summarize it for us in a nicely accessible post to be published by Sunday (the 23rd), ideally running some threads between them.
- Be prepared to present the article and lead the discussion in class
- Post to del.icio.us some links that expand the discussion either about the text or about key themes in it.
