Posts Tagged: Benkler

My questions this week focused on how Shirky and Benkler differentiate in their arguments. I asked how, under Shirky’s theory of the power of the group, we are able to police and remain accountable for the information available to us. I think the example we discussed in class today is the best answer to this question. Although with a group effort there is little accountability, there is also little error. Today we discussed Wikipedia vs. Britannica in class. Wikipedia is a site where anyone can post or share or edit. Britannica is a medium that can only be edited by “experts.” It’s almost hard to believe that the two are comparable when it comes to errors of fact. However, Wikipedia can be changed within seconds whereas Britannica takes until the next edition is available.

This means that the group polices the group. An interesting concept. I was wrong in my original overview in thinking that Benkler had more of a focus on the individual. I am able to answer my own question now that I realize that Benkler and Shirky’s arguments coexist not in contradiction to each other, but in cooperation.They obviously take slightly different approaches in their writing styles and formality, but I think they are both trying to make the point that it takes a village to run a website. We are all editors and experts and policemen when it comes to making sure the information available to us is accurate, relevant, and informative.

From discussion and reading I realize that Benkler’s argument was just as group focused as Shirky’s. Both used relevant examples to illustrate how important the group is in the advancement of technology. The opening anecdote in Shirky’s book is the story of a girl who lost her cell phone and was aided by friends, strangers, and the government in an effort to retrieve it. Similarly, Benkler in chapter 10 talks about how contacts and relationships can be strengthened with the advancement of the Internet. If the concern over Internet content is accuracy, we should feel confident that someone somewhere will correct the mistake. The Internet has such a great potential for information, relationships, and networking, all of which relate directly to this group mentality that Shirky and Benkler are pushing for.

I also wondered how the setup of Benkler’s book affected its content. He is for this idea of open source and software sharing. Therefore, he created a book that can be downloaded for free. I think he did this to further illustrate his point and the importance of fueling creativity with creativity. I think someone in class brought up the analogy that “you have to have money to make money.” Likewise, you have to have creativity and information to make creativity and information. The setup of Benkler’s book is a great example of this. People being able to download, forward, and make corrections and edits to his book is precisely the type of marketplace of information we could hope for. And the Internet is the perfect (and maybe one of the only) medium for this to happen.

In my first question that I posed earlier this week, I was concerned with the idea of creating Internet/ technological identities.  I wondered if people ever eventually started to morph into their technological identity in real life because it is actually truer versions of themselves (due to social pressures).  Benkler’s example of children in Japan who act completely differently in their communication through technology than they do in personal interactions intrigued me.  I am not sure that I am any closer to answering this question.  Benkler does not go into why this is the case in the book.  He merely used this as an example.  I believe that further research and possibly experimentation would be needed to fully answer this question.  This is a fascinating idea that people can act so drastically different through texting and social networking than they do during face-to-face interaction.

In my second question, I asked what the motivations could be that lead a person to participate in peer production projects, such as Wikipedia.  What motivates people the most is an interest in the subject that they are writing about.  This can explain why there are so many more articles about pop culture than there are about eighteenth century poetry.  In addition, I have learned the the number of people who have contributed to Wikipedia went down in the last year for the first time.  This could be because the novelty of this peer production site has worn off, or it could also be because many of the articles that people were motivated to write about and edit have already been created in such a fashion that it does not require any more edits.

Finally, in my last question, I asked a hypothetical question about the idea of concepts becoming to difficult for humans to solve based on our experience and cultural awareness.  This question is also very hard to answer because it is hypothetical and quite abstract.  Perhaps a better question would have been to ask if there are any ideas that are being posited right now that are beyond our current human experience or cultural awareness.  Though Benkler does not answer this question, it would be easier to answer this question through further research.  Even though something may be beyond our scope right now, I believe that as our society continues to grow and evolve, one day it may become a relevant and reachable goal.

1. In the first chapter, the author discusses the generational critiques of the Internet, with the first being that if the Internet gives everyone a voice or a chance to speak, then no one is listening. The second generational critique said the Internet is not as decentralized as we once thought (i.e., very few sites capture a large amount of attention and far more websites go unnoticed). Based on these observations and the continuing evolution of the World Wide Web, what could be some third generation critiques when it comes to networked publics and the democracy of sharing information?

2. In the second chapter, the author explains that many outlets do not rely on copyright royalties to attain their wealth, but rather see a greater benefit in sharing the information at a low (or zero) cost to users in order to have information circulated, thus making profit that way. With companies like the New York Times debating charging users for access to their websites, how would this affect the online information community and, perhaps, the focus on using copyrights for profits?

3. How are community-based websites, such as Wikipedia and Second Life, shaping our cultural understanding of the Internet? What are the social-norms and values (or even self-governing rules of conduct) of participating in these forums and how have they developed?

Benkler

1. How much peer-to-peer sharing is okay? In terms of what should be open source and available for free to users?

2. What can motivate us, as designers, to produce information, knowing that other people are going to use it? Should we be okay with wanting to inspire other people from our work?

Shirky

3. Is everyone really capable of “publishing” in today’s culture? How can we truly define publishing and the art of being a professional?

The sentence structure was really strange at times, but once I got around that I found that these are some questions from the readings I hope to discuss:

*In the introduction, Berkner discusses the development of nonmarket production and its potential. “[…] we have in fact seen the rise of nonmarket production to much greater importance […] such a reach was simply unavailable to diversely motivated individuals before […]The fact that every such effort is available to anyone connected to the network has led to the emergence of coordinate effects.”

What I’m wondering is if traditional marketing companies and funded organizations will soon face the same transition as traditional communication outlets because of the power affect of online networking. Now that people can market and connect with themselves on their own, is there a way for the traditional ways of connecting to transition?

*The quote “The outcome of the conflict between the industrial information economy and its emerging network alternative will determine whether we evolve into a permission culture […] or into a society marked by social practice of nonmarket production and cooperative sharing of information […]”.  Made me wonder that if as a society we do develop cooperative sharing through networks if the education level in America will stabilize. If a person, as long as they’re literate and a little technology savvy, can access information posted by an opinion leader in a certain field, then we’ll all be informed right? I mean as long as the information is correct and we’re not spreading lies.

*Will the ability of connecting through social networks inspire people to become more proactive citizens? With some networks it’s really simple, on Facebook a person can just “Like” the Susan B. Komen Breast Cancer Research Fund link that was sent to them by a friend and now that cause has gained more recognition (in some cases money is automatically donated). But basically, it seems as if even the most lackadaisical citizen can be active in some way due to social networks.

1. Chapter 10 discusses the use of Internet networking to go against social norms of a society.  Benkler gives the example of children in Japan who act completely differently online with friends than they do at home and at school.  Many people create personas for themselves online, and I am curious as to how one might compartmentalize their thoughts and their life so as to have an online persona and a “real” persona.  Do they ever cross, and could one’s real personal eventually morph into their online persona, as in the case of these children, when their online persona is their actual personality, and the “real” persona is just a suppressed version of that person?
2. I was struck by the number of people who devote themselves to creating content on Wikipedia.  Though the number of very active contributors is quite low, I can only imagine the time it takes to create on Wikipedia 100 times in a month.  Though this is the concept behind Wikipedia, what motivates people to spend so much time adding to the site?
3. In the second chapter, Benkler lays out three categories of input for information and culture.  He explains the third category: “The third factor is human communicative capacity—the creativity, experience, and cultural awareness necessary to take from the universe of existing information and cultural resources and turn them into new insights, symbols, or representations meaningful to others with whom we converse.”  So far open-source software and Wikipedia are within the human communicative capacity.  When will an idea go so far that it will not be successful because it is beyond the experience or cultural awareness of most users?