Digg, Wikipedia, and the myth of Web 2.0 democracy. - By Chris Wilson - Slate Magazine - 4 views
-
The same undemocratic underpinnings of Web 2.0 are on display at Digg.com. Digg is a social-bookmarking hub where people submit stories and rate others' submissions; the most popular links gravitate to the site's front page.
-
Ben Rimes on 29 Sep 09Interesting that the word "undemocratic" be used for the discription of the Web 2.0 underbelly. While true, the whiz-bang magic of scripts, bots, and other technological "gatekeepers" are constantly altering what flesh and blood individuals have contributed, the programs meant to serve as custodians are themselves written by humans. The tools that we choose to employ do not make the process of web 2.0 any more undemocratic, rather just that much easier to engage and maintain as relevant. The term democracy itself is difficult to define narrowly (http://www.democracy-building.info/definition-democracy.html). There is no clear determination of how a democracy should be run, but rather a system of democratic beliefs, values, and fundamental rights. Provided that any system meets the needs of a democratic group's values and freedoms (liberties), then one could argue that it is indeed a full fledged democracy. There is more importance on the groups' rules and processes possessing a quality of fluidity and malleability in order to meet a changing environment.
-
-
at Digg.com. Digg is a social-bookmarking hub where people submit stories and rate others' submissions; the most popular links gravitate to the site's front page.
-
While both sites effectively function as oligarchies, they are still democratic in one important sense. Digg and Wikipedia's elite users aren't chosen by a corporate board of directors or by divine right. They're the people who participate the most. Despite the fairy tales about the participatory culture of Web 2.0, direct democracy isn't feasible at the scale on which these sites operate. Still, it's curious to note that these sites seem to have the hierarchical structure of the old-guard institutions they've sought to supplant.
-
Perhaps the problem of disenfranchised and disengaged youth that exists in Europe and the U.S. today isn't that they aren't participating in a healthy way within our democracies, but rather they've found more engaging democracies to participate in online.
-
-
Observing and comparing the "democratic" practices that constitute major web 2.0 sites.
