Wednesday, April 9, 2008

RE: Is Web 2.0 Amoral?


Well I read this article on Wired.com posted by Nicholas Carr on October 3, 2005.
We were talking about the word Amoral in class on the same day I read the article, that's why I got too curious to know more about it...
Therefore; I decided to give a nuetral conclusion based on several sources i used while learning more about Web 2.0... First, I would like to say that Web 2.0 was a great invention for the worldWideWeb. I mean the reason behind its creation was to let humans enjoy their "own" world of peace, liberty and intellegence. I also read that in the future, according to Kevin Kelly, the Web will grant us not only the vision of gods but also their power... (Im a believer so I kinda doubt that but I do understand that the Web will shift humans to a much advanced and powerful level!) However; We have to admit that Web 2.0 has alot of flaws... I'm with Xeni Jardin that when you invite the whole world to your party, inevitably someone pees in the beer. I mean ofcource...
We all suffer from spam, SEO's, junk diaries filled with keyword-rich text to lure traffic for ad revenue. ..
All that is true! I dont know about Wikipedia though I mean i thought Wiki is ranked as equally leveled with Britannica. In the end there are experts that evaluate everything added to Wiki and they decide whether to accept it or not. So it is done by experts too... Although I dont like the downside of that for the economy because encyclopedias', newspapers'... business is going down. We use information we find on the web and use them, we even take them sometimes from blogs and Wikipedia (as in Web 2.0) etc... As for the fact that Web2.0 is supporting the participation of amatuers... Yes, there are amatuers but as a reader, I should be aware of that, I should be able to know what I can consider as a reliable source and yes Wiki is one reliable source that's what Im taught. Ofcourse you shouldnt use Wikipedia as your only source, actually you shouldnt use only 1 source even if it's Britanica, but Wiki is helpful to get an overview of a certain subject... Also, Im against using Web 2.0 for advetising puposes like some companies increase the traffic their site receives from search engines (SEO) but ofcourse ads should still be part of it and can never not be. Any good marketing plan should include participating in something like Web 2.0 that invaded the web so quickly...

The solution in my opinion is to assign protectors for Web 2.0 that would prevent cracks such as spam and so on just like the online photo-sharing service Flickr which, despite its open nature and robust membership growth, has so far remained relatively parasite-resistant. So I think its not impossible to reach that if each society worked on this problem solely.
Is Web 2.0 Amoral? Ofcourse, but i think its closer to being moral than immoral...

Jana:)

2 comments:

Helen&Marny said...

jana ur posts are really nice and they always have new information we need.for the web 2.0 i loved the way u presented it and how u started it especially the word amoral.very nice work,keep it uppp!
marnyyyyy

Jana & Crystal said...

10x marnyyy!!!
im glad u like it...
Jana:)