The Impact of Web 2.0 Applications on the Use of Information - Assignment Example

?The Impact of Wikipedia and Other Web 2.0 Applications on the Use of Information Introduction Different commentators have discussed the impact of the Internet on society. Among these commentators, there is general consensus that the Internet has revolutionized the way people live and how they conduct business. One of the major innovations that have come with the establishment of the World Wide Web is web 2.0. Although web 2.0 is nothing close to a new version of the World Wide Web, and neither is it an improvement on the technical specifications of the web, it has a lot to do with improvements related to how web pages are designed and used. Before the introduction of web 2.0, websites were generally static so that web users were only passive consumers of the contents that the sites presented. Web 2.0 applications, unlike their static counterparts allow users to interact with one another to the extent of creating a virtual community that together contribute toward the generation of content. In other words, web 2.0 allows people to meet virtually while giving each person the capacity to read and write. Common examples of Web 2.0 applications include blogs, social networking sites, web applications, self-publishing platforms, wikis, and video sharing sites, just to mention a few. Postman (1993) has postulated that human culture has greatly changed owing to over-reliance on technology, techniques and tools. He notes that as a result of overuse of technology, people have lost all that traditional culture upheld. Postman notes that the computer and Internet are at the centre of the technopoly. This paper will analyze Postman’s view of human culture as affected by technology. Although Postman is of the view that human culture has been adversely affected by technology, this presents a contrary opinion. This paper hypothesizes that Web 2.0 technologies have positively impacted the way society utilizes information. This paper will analyze the opinions of different authors regarding web 2.0 and Wikipedia and their impacts on information use. The Relationship between Technology and Culture According to Tiles and Oberdiek (1995), those who are optimistic about technology embrace a world view that upholds reasonable use of free will and the application of technological developments to serve humanity. While this should ideally be the case, Postman (1993) feels that this is not the case in the world today. Even as he presents strong sentiments against the over-reliance on technology, Postman notes that technology is a vital part of human existence. Admitting to the positive side of technology, Postman (1993) states that technology has become a dangerous enemy to humans – one that destroys important sources of humanity while eliminating alternatives to itself. He notes that human culture has so evolved to an extent that instead of humans using technology as a support system, technology itself controls humans. Postman states that humans no longer live in a traditional world but exist in what he calls a technopoly. He defines a technopoly as a collective mind state characterized by possession and obsession with tools, technology, and technique. With obsession with technology being a norm, Postman sees a world in which people are bombarded with too much information created by knowledge monopolies. In the technopoly, the computer and technologies such as web 2.0 have changed the way things are done to the detriment of humanity according to Postman (1993). In order to establish how web 2.0 applications have changed human culture, it is vital to understand the characteristics of web 2.0. Characteristics of Web 2.0 Although Web 2.0 has no clear definition, it has basically changed how people use the Internet. The technology gives all users equal freedom to contribute to web content thereby opening ground for serious debate and team work. Some of the main characteristics of web 2.0 according to WebApprater (2012) include user participation, dispersion, and basic trust. Other of it main characteristics include long tail, rich user experience, users as contributors, and free classification of information. As opposed to web 1 applications that were aimed at passing information from top downward and from one party to many parties, web 2.0 applications allow users to create content such as by tagging online content as well as having the capacity to share with other people information after sorting it from the original source. What this means is that Web 2.0 applications make it possible for many people to access and share a lot of information within a short period of time. Furthermore, the applications make it possible for people to personalize their space for sharing content and to converse with other people (Selwyn, n.d.). Although Web 2.0 offers great possibility to users, and contributors, it also opens good ground for unscrupulous individuals who may perform such activities as spamming and trolling. The technology has basically moved the World Wide Web from a static environment to one that is interactive, responsive, social, and collaborative to the extent that it has enhanced the way information is created and used. Web 2.0 Applications and Information Use Web 2.0 applications have greatly impacted the way information is used at the personal and institutional levels. Selweyn, focusing on learning and education, notes that the applications have contributed both positively and negatively to society. Selwyn (n.d.) notes that informal learning is an important element of education for students across all ages. As opposed to formal learning, informal learning occurs outside the classroom environment. In this respect, the learner has greater control of how they learn in the informal arrangement. Evidence from various sources indicates that many people across the world are engaged in informal learning that is founded on the use of technology (Selwyn, n.d.). With the development of web 2.0 applications and technologies, the informal consumption, communication, and sharing of information has greatly increased through e-learning applications. In many colleges and universities, for example, students study online and often are required to engage in online discussions by posting comments or blogs about the subjects that they study. The students and lecturers thus collaborate in sharing information and in completing assignments. In this respect, instead of web 2.0 technologies leading to the creation of knowledge monopolies as postulated by Postman, they lead to the dispersion of information from different sources which ultimately benefits society. Some of the most commonly used web 2.0 applications are social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter. On these sites, individuals post comments that are publicly visible. Through the social media, people get to engage one another in conversations and discussions. While having the capacity to make radical changes in the way people learn and interact, it is worth noting that social sites can and have been abused in some cases. Giving an example of how social media has been abused, Selwin (2007) notes that a study in the U.K. featuring undergraduate students indicated that the activities students engage in through Facebook in the course of the education are tangential to the aims of educators. The study indicated that Facebook presented ground for disruptive students to propagate their views and contest the asymmetrical power relationship that exists among different players in the formal education system. Games have been a source of entertainment for people all over the world since time immemorial. On the entertainment scene, web 2.0 applications revolutionized how games are played and for what purposes they are played. Web 2.0 applications have been used to create online games for entertainment and education purposes. Gee (2005) focuses on the positive side of web 2.0 applications focusing on entertainment and learning and to a great extent disagrees with Postman’s negative views about technology. Many universities, schools and colleges use games to facilitate learning according to Gee (2005). The 3D-virtual worlds that feature in many games serve to make the entertainment world or learning experience get close to reality. The worlds presented by these games also make it possible for the users or gamers can meet other users/gamers, socialize and engage in different activities. In other words, web 2.0 application games add social network services that allow people to interact differently and even do business as they get entertained or learn. In spite of the many benefits of the games, it is beyond doubt that their cons may outweigh their benefits if they are overused or improperly used. Many of the web 2.0 games are so captivating that individuals spend a lot of time that would otherwise be used for creative purposes wasting away in the name of getting entertained. What this means is that the web 2.0 applications have contributed to laziness among people as they consider reading books a boring activity and instead prefer to learn through play. One other area that has been impacted greatly by web 2.0 applications is marketing. Indeed it is not uncommon to find marketers seek customer’s views as they develop products or to enhance the services that they offer to customers. Furthermore, in many websites, the frequently asked questions sections are developed by organizations so that employees can create and edit content to meet customer needs. Organizations also rely on web 2.0 to lure customers to engage in online discussions relating to their products and services as noted by Salvatore (2008). This way, the organization gets to gather information that it may use to improve its products and services or make strategic decisions. Salvatore (2008) presents web 2.0 applications in positive light and seems not to agree Postman’s sentiments that the way technology is used in the marketing field is negative. Andriole (n.d.) notes that different companies have employed different web 2.0 applications in different ways. He notes that these technologies if properly applied have immense benefits to the company and can lead to increased productivity and competitive advantage. Companies, for example, use web 2.0 applications to enhance knowledge management, document products, organize content, train employees, relate with customers, and stimulate innovation. Even as they benefit organizations and individuals, Andriole (n.d.) notes that one of people’s main concerns when using these technologies is security. In this respect, while Andriole agrees with Postman regarding the threats that technology comes with, he is of the view that if properly used, the advantages of technology far outweigh its disadvantages. Professionals in different fields have enjoyed the benefits of social networks in different ways. A recent survey among physicians in the U.S. established that about 90% of physicians make use of one or more web 2.0 application during their medical practice (Dasgupta & Dasgupta, 2009). The physicians mainly use the applications to improve their knowledge base. Security officers and members of the public similarly enjoy the benefits of web 2.0 applications in preventing crime. There are sites that have been created in certain places to track criminals based on their behavior and crime patterns. One such site is Chicago Everyblock. Furthermore, non-governmental organizations have used web 2.0 applications to reach out to people and help them overcome their deprivations and needs (Dasgupta & Dasgupta, 2009). Basically, Dasgupta and Dasgupta present views that are biased toward the positive impacts of web 2.0 applications and to a great extent disagree with Postman’s postulations that technology has taken control of human culture. It is important at this to focus on one specific web 2.0 technology or application to highlight how it has affected information use in society. In this respect, Wikipedia will be analyzed in the section that follows. Wikipedia and Information Use Wikipedia is a wiki and web 2.0 application that brings together information on virtually all topics and subjects under one website. Wikipedia, was developed in 2001, an improvement on an online encyclopedia going by the name Nupedia. Lim (2009) notes that the popularity of Wikipedia as a site for finding facts quickly and for background research has grown ever since its establishment. A research conducted at the Pew Internet and American Life Project revealed that well educated people tended to use Wikipedia more than their less educated counterparts (Lim, 2009). Lim notes that while the reliability and quality of information presented by Wikipedia is subject to a lot of debate, several experts have noted that the wiki is reasonably good in terms of quality and reliability. The various articles by Wikipedia are authored by different people, some of whom are not authorities in the fields in which they write. In fact, the passive user of the content presented in the site never gets to know the author of the specific article that they write and when they were last updated. While this is the case, several authors have noted that the author’s identity is not a very vital criterion when it comes to assessing the credibility of a website by web users (Lim, 2009). In any case, most consumers of web content such as students are more concerned about the convenience and speed of accessing information as compared to the credibility of the author. Many people who use Wikipedia trust that to a great extent its content is accurate and up-to-date. Based on the information that they get from the site, users of the site make decisions or add to their knowledge base (Lim, 2009). Without focusing on the positive and negative sides of Wikipedia Lim brings to focus the extent to which Wikipedia is used by people in different countries and seeking different kinds of information. On his part, Huvila (2010) notes that three main principles that guide the content presented on Wikipedia include: no original research, neutral presentation of facts, and presentation of verifiable information. Given that Wikipedia presents various facts while taking a neutral point of view, it is considered by many as being an unbiased source of information which ultimately improves its reliability. Authors of articles that feature in the Wiki have the opportunity to update the articles that they write such as by providing references and adding more information. Similarly, users of the site can suggest additions, subtractions or other kinds of editions to already written content which ultimately makes the content dynamic in nature (Huvila, 2010). The authors of articles that feature in Wikipedia get their information from various sources including books, news articles, journal articles, school notes, and from personal observations and experiences. Like Lim, Huvila basically presents some of the important features of Wikipedia that qualify it as a web 2.0 application. Huvila further notes that Wikipedia is an important source of information that is used by different people in positive ways, thereby disqualifying Postman’s negative postulations Conclusion Different authors agree that Web 2.0 applications have greatly impacted the way people create and use information. The various applications have made it possible to the users of information be creators of information as well. This characteristic of web 2.0 applications has made the technologies enjoy widespread use in virtually every sector of the global economy – marketing, medicine, science, education, and security, just to mention a few. While Postman sees the negative side of having too much information in circulation, the technologies seem to have impacted the society positively to a greater extent that it has destroyed it according to the different authors. Blogs, youtube, interactive websites, wikis, social network sites, and online games among other applications have all improved the way people use information to create more content and to solve problems more effectively. References Andriole S. (n.d). Impact of Web 2.0 Technologies, Wikis, Blogs, Podcasts, Mashups, Folksonomies, RSS Filters, Social Networks, Virtual Worlds & Crowdsourcing for Corporate Productivity & Management: Early Impact Assessments. Retrieved July 13, 2013 from http://www.liquidhub.com/docs/Impact_of_Web_2_technologies.pdf Dasgupta D. & Dasgupta, R. (2009). Social Networks using Web 2.0. Retrieved July 13, 2013 from http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-socialcollab/ Gee, P. (2005). Why video games are good for your soul: pleasure and learning. New York: Common Ground Huvila I. (2010).Where does the information come from? Information source use patterns in Wikipedia. Information Research 15(3) http://informationr.net/ir/15-3/paper433.html Lim S. (2009). How and Why Do College Students Use Wikipedia? Journal of the American Society for Information Science And Technology, 0(11):2189–2202 http://marlajarmer.net.p9.hostingprod.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/wikipedia_4.30381550.pdf Postman N. (1993). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Vintage Books. Salvatore P. (2008). "The Secrets of Marketing in a Web 2.0 World". The Wall Street Journal. Selwyn N. (n.d.). Web 2.0 applications as alternative environments for informal learning - a critical review. London: Institute of Education, University of London, UK Selwyn, N. (2007) Researching computers and education. Computers and Education, 34, (2)93-101 Tiles, M. & Oberdiek, H. (1995). Living in a Technological Culture: Human Tools and Human Values. New York: Routledge. WebApprater (2012). 7 Key features of web 2.0. Retrieved 13 July, 2013 from www.webApprater.com Read More