>
Web 2.0 backlash?
- 5 Jun 07, 01:11 AM
A new book about web 2.0 is due to be released this month, and already it is causing some controversy.
, a one-time web entrepreneur and university lecturer, and now a media commentator, makes a wide-ranging assault on user-generated content websites, like , and blogging in general. In his book, "The Cult of the Amateur" Keen's main argument is that the democratisation of the web, where anyone can blog or make videos, threatens to overwhelm our culture. Rather than becoming the font of all human knowledge, the web is being submerged with mediocre content and factual errors.
The book promises to be controversial and thought provoking with battle lines being drawn on both sides of the argument. But I have to say that his generalisations do not hold true as far as disability issues are concerned.
For me, there is no doubt that web 2.0 is a great enabler. Blogging has given a voice to people who are still not well represented in traditional media. Video blogging lets people create films in British Sign Language. Social networking means that people can interact with others with similar life experiences and can bring an important sense of community to individuals.
There is no question in my mind that blogging, for example, has lead to a massive rise in material for special interest groups. Thinking back ten years ago, how much was there to read about autism for example? Perhaps the odd news item in a paper, or a scientific article. Today, there is the , where you can find loads of blogs from people with autism, family members and professionals. The same goes for BSL video on .
If we were to return to an age where content on the internet was left to traditional media experts, as Keen seems to hanker for, then it would be a poorer place.
The 大象传媒 is not responsible for the content of external internet sites
颁辞尘尘别苍迟蝉听听 Post your comment
Content on the web was never just the purview of media experts, given that Universities were on the cutting edge of the cutting edge of the technology, personal home pages written by academics and students alike were a mainstay long before "new media" was born or old media noticed the new outlet. It is easier for those that don't understand (x)html or uploading to create content and cheaper to have it hosted in the current climate but it has always been the case that the issue is education users to be able to discern which content can be relied on and how to assess internet facts for accuracy.
Keen's book sounds like another bunch of sour grapes from someone who has an elitist view of the 'net and has fallen into the nostalgia trap of hankering after a golden age that never existed.
Web 2.0 doesn't exist anyway, all it is is the gluing together of technology that already existed in a more accessible way, it is like saying Oyster is London Transport 2.0.
Complain about this post
You mean TfL hasn't already hijacked that as a slogan? I'm shocked :)
Web 2.0, Semantic web, user generated content - whatever buzz-phrase is used nowadays, it all boils down to an easier way for everyone to share their minds (or, in the case of some, lack thereof).
Just like anything else, it's going to end up with good stuff, bad stuff, and the slimy green stuff you find stuck to the sole of your shoe after hiking through some farmer's field.
Big surprise, the web had just the same "problem" before Tim coined "Web 2.0". Yes, it required a little more knowledge to produce the content and get it out there, but the web had gems and dross just the same.
"Web 2.0" doesn't produce crap content - lusers produce crap content :)
The main reason people complain about the content is that it's given "normal" people a better chance to reach the audience that needs to hear them. For every Jedi Kid, there's a couple of Jane Tomlinsons. I'm more than happy to skip the former to hear about the latter.
Complain about this post
I don't see how rubbish on the internet is any different to the rubbish on TV.
Just because there are thousands of channels on satellite and cable, doesn't mean that I have to sit there, watch them all and believe them.
The internet is a great provider of information, and entertainment.
I also think that because people can be their own publishers; it is a great outlet for creativity - and more importantly, it teaches them not to believe everything they read.
Complain about this post