Today, we're going to teach you some fun facts about Salmon, And a brand new dance!

Now that I have your attention...

Web 1.0 V Web 2.0

“Web 2.0 is the business revolution in the computer industry caused by the move to the internet as platform, and an attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform” (O’Reilly as cited in Bruns, 2008)

Key difference between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0?

While Web1.0 was more “one way”, web 2.0 allows consumers to be more involved in creating, contributing, editing and sharing the content they were once only able to passively consume.

Web 2.0 vs Web 1.0
Web 1.0 was about reading, Web 2.0 is about writing
Web 1.0 was about companies, Web 2.0 is about communities
Web 1.0 was about client-server, Web 2.0 is about peer to peer
Web 1.0 was about HTML, Web 2.0 is about XML
Web 1.0 was about home pages, Web 2.0 is about blogs
Web 1.0 was about portals, Web 2.0 is about RSS
Web 1.0 was about taxonomy, Web 2.0 is about tags
Web 1.0 was about wires, Web 2.0 is about wireless
Web 1.0 was about owning, Web 2.0 is about sharing
Web 1.0 was about IPOs, Web 2.0 is about trade sales
Web 1.0 was about Netscape, Web 2.0 is about Google
Web 1.0 was about web forms, Web 2.0 is about web applications
Web 1.0 was about screen scraping, Web 2.0 is about APIs
Web 1.0 was about dialup, Web 2.0 is about broadband
Web 1.0 was about hardware costs, Web 2.0 is about bandwidth costs
(http://joedrumgoole.com/blog/2006/05/29/web-20-vs-web-10/)

Consumers who no longer merely consume, but interact with content are defined by Bruns (2008) as produsers as they are also producers of information and knowledge; their online usage is productive. Web 2.0 enables users around the world to contribute online in ways that web 1.0 did not allow for. While some encourage and support the produser trend, others are highly critical of the shift allowing consumers to participate more in the online environment. The role of produsers; the quality of their work and editing and the impact of this trend on businesses are some of the main issues surrounding web 2.0.

The quality of produser information is a debatable topic, with some claiming it to provide valuable information and alternate points of view while others condemn consumer input as lacking in credibility and value. Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit and is a collaborative produser effort. According to Wikipedia (2008) itself, at present the site has 2,339,077 articles just in English, while the Britannica has approximately 85,000 articles and Encarta contains around 630,000 articles. This illustrates the dedication of produsers to contribute and enhance content, some of which may have been ignored and overlooked by traditional information sources. Some critics however mock the value of user participation and one has labelled Wikipedia as “no more reliable than the output of a millions monkeys banging away at their typewriters” (Keen as cited in Levy, 2007). Others such as Bruns (2008) dispute this view and argue that sites like Wikipedia in regards to quality, are matching such publications as the Encyclopedia Britannica as the quality of online content is gradually improved as large communities of participants make small changes to already existing information.

Criticism of user participation and produser content in regards to quality may be used to disguise a deeper fear that a power shift is occurring between consumers and business, companies and authoritative information sources. For example, traditional print media sources have been responsible for providing the community with news for some time and have had the ability to influence and dictate public opinion. Traditionally, journalists would collect information and write up reports, editors would then review their work and news would get published accordingly. Now, users themselves can create, edit and alter information online. According to Saunders (2007) some reasons as to why people are engaging in and with user created content is as it provides and allows for alternate news and views that are ignored or silenced in mainstream media to be voiced and pushes boundaries of debate. Whereas once traditional news media outlets were in a position of high power, with the ability to tell consumers what to think about, what is important and what the facts are, produser content is threatening this authority. For traditional new sources and professional journalists, “for the first time, its hegemony as gatekeeper of news is threatened by not just new technology and competitors but by the audience it serves" (Bowman & Willis, 2005).

According to Bruns (2008), commercial adaptation to produsage will aid in accelerating the produsage trend whilst maintaining industry stability, whereas as negative efforts to undermine produsage may too accelerate the trend. I think that traditional news and information sources must acknowledge and react to produsage and participatory culture and this shift from passive to active consumers, as the situation the music industry is now in (eg. Music piracy and diminishing need for “middle men” between consumers and artists) is an example of how dangerous ignoring consumer trends and activities can be.

Bowman, S. ,& Willis, W. (2005). The future is here, but do news media companies see it? 59 (10), 6-10. Cambridge:Nieman Reports. Retrieved 14 September, 2007, from ProQuest Database.

Bruns, A. (2008). Introduction. Blogs , Wikipedia, Second Life and Beyond: From Production to Produsage. (Chapter 1). Retrieved April 19, 2008, from http://produsage.org/files/Produsage%20-%20Introduction.pdf

Bruns, A. (2008). Produsage:Towards a broader framework for user-led creation. Retrieved April 19, 2008 , from http://produsage.org/files/Produsage%20(Creativity%20and%20Cognition%202007).pdf

Bruns, A (2008). The future is user-led:The path towards widespread produsage.Retrieved April 19, 2008, from http://produsage.org/files/The%20Future%20Is%20User-Led%20(PerthDAC%202007).pdf

Levy, S (2007).Invasion of the web amateurs. Newsweek. Retrieved September 1, 2007, from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17661199/site/newsweek

Saunders, B. (2007). Blogging, citizen journalism and web 2.0. The Kids Just Don’t Read Newspapers No More Part 2. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology. [Lecture:KCB102 Media & Society: From the Printing Press to the Internet]

Step 1 Start blogging

Ok so I’ve finally started blogging!So my footy team lost on the weekend boohoo but I scored a sweet new job yay yah!I don’t think this is supposed to be a “personal” blog so moving onto more unit related issues...Now I may not be the most dedicated KCB201er but hey I’m making... some sort of effort.

So Online V Offline... Now KCB201 is not my favourite unit, which is probably reflected in my lack of attendance in lectures and tutorials! It’s nothing personal against the lecturer or tutor I just think I’m more interested in the offline and not what’s happening online or with technology, even though what’s happening online is undeniably impacting on the offline world in a BIG way...

Two of my housemates seem to live in the cyber world, preferring to talk to friends in Asia over Skype or messenger all day and engage in online communities day and night rather than socialise with the people around them. Bruns (2008) points out that on the internet, regardless of such factors as geographical location, ethnicity, physical disability or personality limitations people can connect with like-minded people and this is quite liberating for some. It’s great for my housemates, who can talk to people all over the world from the comfort of their rooms without being judged on their characteristics, habits and other factors (such as compulsive hand washing, shutting the house door 5 times in a row before leaving, shredding toilet paper...oh the list goes on but enough for now) that may negatively influence one’s ability to socialise in the offline world.

I think that while the internet is an enabler, the case of my housemates also illustrates that while the internet can be a tool for online social interaction and communication, at the same time it can also act as a tool for offline social isolation and exclusion. Nie and Ebring’s study (as cited in Flew, 2004, p.68) found that people may become more socially isolated or depressed as they increase their internet usage. While I believe this to be true in alot of cases (or maybe just with my housemates,), on the otherhand I also think that maybe some people would be shy or anti social even if the internet did not exist. Maybe in some cases, people who are “addicted” to the internet and act in an anti-social manner or feel uncomfortable in offline situations would be like this even without MySpace, Messenger and the internet. In fact, maybe they are more social, even though they are not engaging in face-to-face interaction, thanks to the internet.

For me, using social networking sites such as MySpace and Windows Messenger positively impacts on my offline social life and I guess the two are starting to blur. I would never discuss important issues over the internet just as you would not “air your dirty laundry” in public. However, for general chit chat or organising to catch up with someone in the “real world” the internet is very useful. I also rely on the internet to find out about new music, as music can appear online on such sites as MySpace and YouTube days, weeks and even months before appearing in stores.

Recently I also read an article on Ninemsn (which sadly accounts for most of my news intake!) about cyber bullying. Nowadays, bullying can happen at school and at home, with people spreading rumours online and sending threatening and malicious messages and threats via the internet. According to the article I read, the solution to cyber bullying is not as simple as signing out of messenger or turning off the computer (Bartlett & Gaitz, 2008). I guess this is because offline and online are becoming more interconnected; what happens at school can follow you home and vice versa. Cyber bullying is something I don’t completely understand, because when I was in school, I don’t remember hearing about “cyber bullying” once and I only graduated in 2006. I don’t know if it was because people “back in the day” preferred to physically fight and hit each other with crow bars and ukuleles or because victims never complained. I don’t know how relevant this is but I think it does highlight how online and offline behaviour can intersect and is becoming harder and harder to separate.

So I’m thinking now that I’ve got this blog thing goin on, I should probably start to use more references...

Bartlett,L., (Reporter) & Gaitz,G. (Producer). (2008, April 13). Cyber Bullies. Sixty Minutes. [Television broadcast transcript]. Nine Television. Retrieved April 13, 2008, from http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=444908

Bruns,A. (2008, April 10). Online communities [Podcast:KCB201 virtual cultures]. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology.

Flew,T. (2004). Virtual Cultures.In T. Flew. New media:an introduction. (pp.61-82). Melbourne:OUP.