This chapter took me 2 days to get through and process and I
still have questions.
However, for my response today, I am going to focus on what concept kept coming
back to me while reading; the idea of Netscape vs Google and Britannica vs
Wikipedia and ‘new ethos stuff’. I
remember using both Netscape and Britannica when I was younger, and I remember
teachers telling me I can’t use Wikipedia in academic papers as a source and I
shouldn’t “trust it” because anyone can edit.
Until very recently, I still considered Wikipedia an unreliable source, even though it is always my go to for quick answers. It was something I read last semester in a class that I began to really understand how Wikipedia works and how it is becoming a very reliable source (look it up if you don't know, it is quite interesting). When I was in middle school, I thought I was so lucky to have Britannica online (in addition to a set of encyclopedias my grandma bought us one Christmas) and I could put the CD-ROM in and become an expert on my research topic. As I was reading, I began to understand the difference between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0. I don’t remember the specifics of the dotcom crash but it all makes sense now: the companies that were interactive and allowed users to contribute were the ones that survived.
I think I have taken all this ‘new literacies’ and Web 2.0
stuff for granted. This chapter really
helped me understand how it used to be and how/why it has changed. I even created a website for a class solely
dedicated to Web 2.0 tools and I never really understood what a Web 2.0 tool
was until now. The examples Lankshear
and Knobel use to help describe the shift (Britannica to Wikipedia) were really
helpful to me. They say, “In the Web 1.0
business model, producers create the product and make it available. In the Web 2.0 business model, customers or
users actually help build the business for the ‘owner’, by using the software
to generate content - such as ideas, data, texts, images, video content, etc. -
that creates value, and where this value brings advantage to the ‘owner’ of the
business” (p. 69). Again, this chapter
was a lot to soak in but if I thought of it all in terms of Britannica to
Wikipedia, it was easier for me to follow.
Now I think I have a grasp on the shift, I have so many more
wonderings about the future. Will there
ever be a Web 4.0 or 5.0? Will the internet
become too saturated with information and Web 2.0 tools that we have another
crash? What will the future hold in the
next 20 years? Looking back at my last
internship in Marketing/PR before I decided to be a teacher, my job was
advertising and promoting events through ‘grassroots marketing’. When I interviewed I had no idea what that
meant, I knew about blogs but didn’t really get them. I think about how much I have learned in the
past 5 years (Twitter, blogs, Instagram, Flickr, Tumblr, etc.) and I can’t even
imagine what it will all look like in another 5 years!
Out of curiosity and in an effort to find images for my post, I Googled "Web 3.0" and this image really struct me!
 |
| I found this image from a blog, but after further reading, the image was created by Dr. John Moravec |
Emily,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your views on the shift from when you were in school to now. I must say I absolutely take advantage of today's resources and I know others do as well. Sometimes I'll see a post on facebook from an article from the Onion and the person is taking it seriously. They don't know that the Onion is a farse.
In a different sense, I'm not as scared to drive somewhere new with technology like google maps at my fingertips. If I want to find a new restaurant to go to I just have to look up their menu and reviews where as back in the day you had to go off of word of mouth or just try it and hope for the best.
What a change we've gone through as a society just in the last decade!
It certainly is a much different but more convenient world! Imagine travelling and having to try a restaurant without Trip Advisor!! I can't even :)
ReplyDeleteEmily,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your post, I had no idea there was even a web 3.0! I also think it is interesting that you bring up wiki being an unreliable source. I remember growing up and all of my teachers told me the same. Though I do not cite wiki as a source I definitely still go there to get an overview and sometimes I find it more reliable than other sources!
I didn't really know there was a Web 3.0 either! I just figured it was inevitable. I have never cited wiki either but it is a great starting point or quick reference for students!
ReplyDeleteGoing off of Erin's comment - you mentioned seeing someone comment on an Onion article on Facebook not knowing it was false. I think this is the biggest danger with Web 2.0 is not knowing what is true and what is false. Today it is so easy to share information that one could sway someone's opinion too easily. I think about the last presidential election and all of the social content from both parties. With Web 2.0 are the facts more readily available AND harder to find at the same time?
ReplyDeleteMike,
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you, it is also my fear. The 'facts' are harder to find because so much of Web 2.0 is opinion via blogs or tweets. The uninformed voter or student or kid could easily see one opinion piece and run with it not knowing if there is any evidence to support the opinion.
Thanks for your comments!