Saturday, April 9, 2011
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Reagle, Joseph Michael, Jr. Good Faith Collaboration: The Culture of Wikipedia. Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London: The MIT Press, 2010. 173 pages text; 244 pages with endnotes, index.
Joseph Reagle's ethnographic study of Wikipedia examines the inner workings of Wikipedia, and in particular, Reagle focuses on Wikipedians, the people who create the articles, and the rules and policies that have evolved over time (not much time, since Wikipedia celebrated its tenth anniversary only in 2011). Since Wikipedia claims to be "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit," then I suppose we are all Wikipedians in waiting if we aren't already editing articles.
To answer the question posed in the title of the post, Wikipedia is a "place" where individuals interested in a topic can "gather" to build something: in this case, an encyclopedia article. While doing this, they learn the rules of the discourse community, rules that help them "play nice" with others, even if they adamantly disagree with one another. When it works, Wikipedia is this great social experiment where people with a vested interest in an article (actually, their interest is not the article itself, but what the article (re)presents) can exchange ideas, debate, deliberate, and create. How many civic institutions exist today that can promise the same? In an era where the left goes to left-wing media and the right goes to right-wing media, it is becoming harder and harder to find or create environments where individuals can wrestle with one another in meaningful ways to build something of value to both sides (and other sides) of an issue.
If you like to read ethnography - described by many as "thick-description" - then you might enjoy Good Faith Collaboration. I realize that is a very small audience. Or if you are interested in the behind-the-scenes workings of Wikipedia (which, by the way, are available for viewing by everyone who visits a Wikipedia article: all one needs to do is click an article's edit history or talk/discussion tab to see what is lurking beneath the surface of any given article), then you might be interested in the book. If you want to consider Wikipedia within a historical context of other encyclopedias, then this is a great source. If you want a quick overview of criticism targeting Wikipedia, the chapter titled "Encyclopedic Anxiety" will meet your needs. I read the book because I teach a course that focuses on Wikipedia, and I am particularly interested in how Wikipedia challenges our usual notions of audience.
There are many interesting quotes in Good Faith Collaboration, but my favorite is something called "Zeroeth Law":
The problem with Wikipedia is that it only works in practice. In theory, it can never work. (169)I'll write more about this practice in future posting.
Friday, March 18, 2011
I finished Shirky's second book (for the longest time, his first book - Here Comes Everybody - was my constant recommendation to anyone who would listen). This book is not as eye-opening as the first book, but Here Comes Everybody is a tough act for anyone to follow. That said, Cognitive Surplus is now at the top of my recommendation list.
One of Shirky's most effective rhetorical strategies is his use of stories to tell a larger story. This is true in Cognitive Surplus, which begins with a wonderful story about the Gin Craze of London in the 1720s and ends with a delightful tale of a friend's child watching a DVD movie and then suddenly leaping from the couch because she was "looking for the mouse" (212). In between are many anecdotes that Shirky brings to life so that the reader might understand how the read/write web (Web 2.0) has provided us a space for our cognitive surplus.
Shirky does not look kindly on television, even as he admits to his own voracious viewing habits as a young person. He asserts that for much of the second half of the twentieth century, we spent our cognitive surplus watching television. He writes amusingly of his own television viewing habits, describing them variously as a "job" and an "obligation." In a section titled "More is Different" from the first chapter, Shirky muses:
Did you ever see that episode of Gilligan's Island where they almost get off the island and then Gilligan messes up and they don't? I saw that one a lot when I was growing up. And every half hour I watched it was a half hour in which I wasn't sharing photos or uploading video or conversing on a mailing list. (21)He commits the bulk of the book to analyzing and critiquing the elements of cognitive surplus - means, motive, opportunity, and culture - and he devotes entire chapters to each. Throughout, he weaves the primary motives for participating: autonomy and creativity, sharing and generosity.
The final two chapters explore the potential of collaborative uses of our individual cognitive surplus, and I am particularly interested in his chapter devoted to "Personal, Communal, Public, Civic" uses.
Read the book. If this posting doesn't convince you, take fourteen minutes to watch this video on youtube:
Clay Shirky, "How cognitive surplus will change the world."