The buzz word status of Web 2.0 has fuelled a multifaceted debate surrounding the differences between this 'new' development and Web 1.0. It can be put to rest, according to Tim O'Reilly (2004), that the re-branding of the Web 1.0 simply aims to illustrate the changes in the ways software developers and consumers employ the World Wide Web, rather than referring to any technical specifications or changes in technological elements. Furthermore, O'Reilly (2004) describes Web 2.0 as a business which embraces the web as a platform by using its strengths, such as a potentially global audience. Bruns (2008) predicts that "the rise of what is now described as social software or Web 2.0 environments stands to have a profound impact on social practices, the media, economic and legal frameworks, and democratic society itself...". This illustrates that Web 2.0 acts as a catalyst for how consumers are fast becoming producers of their own content, leading into Bruns'(2008) term produser.
Bruns (2008) delineates the need for the term produser by ascertaining that “… the distinctions between producers and users of content have faded into comparative insignificance”. In my opinion, the increasing democracy of the internet, through increasing participation in Web 2.0 environments, will have an impact on not only the things Axel Bruns' (2008) mentions, but also on communication in its most basic form. That is, I agree with what Wesch (2006) points out in his video The Machine is Us/ing Us (see Video link on right hand side of this page); that this participatory manner in which people approach communication via the internet will not only have an impact on social practices, but make society totally rethink values and beliefs, such as family and love, not to mention ourselves as individuals. As a member of a physical society, community and family, it may prove difficult to identify ourselves with the same connection in an online environment. It is my understanding that it is this process which is not only helped but encouraged by Web2.0 environments.
As for how this approach differs from the approach widely employed for Web 1.0, the dissimilarities speak volumes about how produsage (Bruns, 2008) has grown throughout this shift, and thus how the shift from unquestioned consumerism to user-created content has been embraced and utilized. Whilst the products of Web 1.0, Bruns (2008) gives the example of Microsoft Windows, are offered to consumers to use, they are not given to be extended or contributed to (Bruns, 2008). Thus, comparisons can be drawn between this traditional approach to media content as produced by others, and the contemporary and expanding approach of user-created content, or produsage (Bruns, 2008).
To conclude this web log on this particular issue, it must be acknowledged that 'participatory culture', a term coined by Henry Jenkins (2007), is what is being supported by Web2.0 as a thoroughfare into produsage (Bruns, 2008). Bruns (2008) suggests of production and produsage that one will never completely take over the other, but it is this idea which must be questioned by consumers, in order for them to ever fully participate in produsage. That is, if this 'new' way of living and communicating is never going to become the only way, then why must we embrace it? Just some food for thought....
Til next time,
Sarah D
1 comment:
Sarah, I thoroughly enjoyed your blog on Web 2.0. Your comments regarding Web 2.0 beginning to encourage online connections that parallel real life connections were extremely thought provoking. Even though I am an avid user of Facebook, I do not see this taking over from my real life connections. While the increase of mobile phones, another new media technology, has made communication with others more easy and fast through SMS, to me this still doesn’t match or overtake a one-on-one interaction.
Interestingly, my workplace recently introduced a couple of ‘social networking’ groups, with a Seniors group and Mother’s Group, fuelled by points you raise in your blog. These groups are encouraged to attend Westfield Garden City for the period of one hour per month. This is a means for them to communicate, find friends and enjoy social interaction with like minded people in the real world – something that is quickly disappearing due to the rise of online social networks. The inspiration for these groups came from thinking along the same lines as your blog, that while online connections are great, it ‘may prove difficult to identify ourselves with the same connection’ as an offline connection. This is proof that your thoughts are being implemented in a ‘real world’ situation! Lauren.
Post a Comment