Week 5 – Internet Governance

The knowledge that accumulates online is vast due to the highly user-driven nature of the internet. Users can navigate themselves in this prodigious pool of data thanks to the structure of folksonomy.

Folksonomy is the classification of knowledge created by users. For instance, the tagging system on blogs allows users to attribute certain keywords to their blog entries to help their readers find entries related to specific topics/keywords. Folksonomy derives its meaning from the word “folk,” referring to the traditional knowledge passed down in generations of family groups. The latter part of the term refers to classification and organization, much like the term taxonomy, which indicates a system of classification. So given that the data is contributed by users, who themselves classify the data, the structure of folksonomy is very much determined by the content added by internet users.

Folksonomy extends itself to the process of globalization in the sense that “folk” knowledge used to be restricted to family/community generations in a specific region. It can now be shared with an international audience – the global internet community. In addition to this global audience, “folk” knowledge could also be examined in relation to the origins or the nascent stages of any ideas being developed over time and shared online.

Week 4 – What is social networking?

Are wikis an effective means of communication?  Why or why not?  Why does it matter?

If something is effective it means it is successful in performing an intended purpose or function.

Wikipedia is an internet source for general knowledge. Anyone with access to the internet can add and/or edit information about virtually any topic in existence.

I think the effective-ness of wikipedia could be measured in the degree that it allows people to access general knowledge that is accurate and cohesively organized. Having said that wikis provide an effective platform of communication in allowing people who may never have met to collaborate on creating a pool of information for the general public. The fact that there is no physical human interaction between the authors may even help the authors develop their written communication skills. They have to be clear in conveying their ideas in written form otherwise their co-contributors may dismiss their input as unsubstantial. It is also very effective in dispensing general knowledge because it also crosses language barriers. Wikipedia has “85,000 active contributors working on more than 14,000,000 articles in more than 250 languages.”

Conversely, the massive amount of contributors and articles also challenges the idea of efficacy of wikis in disseminating information. The huge numbers of contributors and articles, along with its open-free-editing format raises the issue of quantity over quality. There are likely thousands of useless articles on wiki and this speaks to the idea of the internet being a sea of useless “data.” It’s also difficult to trust the quality of the data because the author may not be a credible source given that anyone can access it.

The effectiveness of Wikipedia can be viewed as a micro-study of the internet that relates to, as discussed in class, whether the free flow of online data creates superfluous matter or whether it creates information that can be useful for communicating ideas that can have any sort of positive impact.

Source: google search turned up irrelevantcombinations.blogspot.com

Are wikis an effective means of communication?  Why or why not?  Why does it matter?

If something is effective it means it is successful in performing an intended purpose or function.

Wikipedia is an internet source for general knowledge. Anyone with access to the internet can add and/or edit information about virtually any topic in existence.

I think the effective-ness of wikipedia could be measured in the degree that it allows people to access general knowledge that is accurate and cohesively organized. Having said that wikis provide an effective platform of communication in allowing people who may never have met to collaborate on creating a pool of information for the general public. The fact that there is no physical human interaction between the authors may even help the authors develop their written communication skills. They have to be clear in conveying their ideas in written form otherwise their co-contributors may dismiss their input as unsubstantial. It is also very effective in dispensing general knowledge because it also crosses language barriers. Wikipedia has “85,000 active contributors working on more than 14,000,000 articles in more than 250 languages.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About#Strengths.2C_weaknesses.2C_and_article_quality_in_Wikipedia)

Conversely, the massive amount of contributors and articles also challenges the idea of efficacy of wikis in disseminating information. The huge numbers of contributors and articles, along with its open-free-editing format raises the issue of quantity over quality. There are likely thousands of useless articles on wiki and this speaks to the idea of the internet being a sea of useless “data.” It’s also difficult to trust the quality of the data because the author may not be a credible source given that anyone can access it.

The effectiveness of Wikipedia can be viewed as a micro-study of the internet that relates to, as discussed in class, whether the free flow of online data creates superfluous matter or whether it creates information that can be useful for communicating ideas that can have any sort of positive impact.