Net 308/508 Internet Collaboration and Organisation S1 2012

In the article, Collaboration in context: Comparing article evolution among subject disciplines in Wikipedia, the writers Katherine Ehmann, Andrew Large and Jamshid Beheshti, compare a small selection of articles - some newly created, and some well-established - from three subject disciplines - the hard sciences, soft sciences and humanities - in order to examine the article quality, how it differs from discipline to discipline and if it changes over time (Ehmann, Large & Beheshti, 2008). One of the most interesting findings that was published in this article was that, contrary to previous research (Brandle, 2005; Dondio, et al., 2006; Lig, 2004; Stvilia, et al., 2005a, 2008; Wilkinson and Huberman, 2007), the articles used that had a greater number of edits than the others, were not the articles of the highest quality (Ehmann, Large & Beheshti, 2008). Wikipedia articles on average retained 90.3 percent of their original text and in general, only small edits were made over time (Ehmann, Large & Beheshti, 2008). I believe these new findings still support, 'the wisdom of crowds' theory though (Surowiecki, 2004, p. 5). Even though a large portion of the text remains from the original contributor, the small edits by other contributors over time, still help to fine-tune the article's meaning and readability. The authors' exploration into Wikipedia Talk pages is also of interest, especially how these places aided the collaboration and coordination process and how this in turn contributed to the quality of articles in Wikipedia (Ehmann, Large & Beheshti, 2008). While Ehmann, Large and Beheshti only studied a small number of articles, and another study is required which examines a larger number of articles, in order to make more conclusive findings, I think this article is still a useful resource (Ehmann, Large & Beheshti, 2008). It is constructive to compare this article's findings to the findings in the Rosenzweig article (Rosenzweig, 2006).

I think this article is interesting and pointed wisdom of crowd cannot bring high quality for Wikipedia's article. Talk pages are playing important role in Wikipedia, editors post their suggestion there and other active editors come and follow them or put other suggestion to make a more credible article (in Talk pages the most request belonged to the suggestion for editing and completeness had the less request followed by accuracy and accessibility) (Beheshti, Ehmann & Large, 2088). According to my own research, one of the important things, which mentions in talk pages is about sources of articles which can take a place as print resources, deep web resources external links and inexact references. Disagreement about content of articles is another important subject in Wikipedia and before an article edited, editors discuss in talk pages about adding controversial material or removing content, and then they get a decision to how edit the article. Talk pages may use to notify other users to know this article had recent edit or editors ask their questions there from other or they request for help. However, the author mentioned participation of contributors on different topics is different. There are many articles which have only one comment on their talk page and there is large number of articles who has various comment and suggestions on their talk page (Breslin, Passant & Schneider, 2010). Breslin, J, G., A, Passant. & Schneider, J. (2010). A content analysis: How Wikipedia talk pages are used. 7. Retrieved from http://journal.webscience.org/373/2/websci10_submission_80.pdf

Collaboration in Context takes an in-depth view at the collaboration which produces Wikipedia pages. I was attracted to this resource in that I imagined it would assist me in understanding how users interacted in a organised context - ie. the mindsets of users collaborating on a specific, and, in the case of many Wikipedia pages, complex, task. Whilst the paper examines the development of pages from a 'contributor's' point of view, it does this through statistical interpretation of a set of data the authors assembled on page edits. The result is that the paper doesn't so much uncover the nuances of collaboration in an organisational setting, as relate the nuts and bolts of page editing. Perhaps, the mores of collaboration might be inferred from this reading of Wikipedia's collaborative process, though I found it difficult to see this in numbers rather than testimony from wikipedians themselves. What this paper does do is highlight the efficacy of 'talk pages' in the process of building of 'rich' Wikipedia entries. These forums provide the engine of collaboration on Wikipedia - users able to get together as a group to uncover the most efficient ways to combine their work - the paper concluding, "Talk pages - in addition to article edits themselves - provide wikipedians with a powerful means of shaping the presentation of knowledge. (chap.8)" This information is useful to me in the way I will be able to compare it to the, say, simpler, and more spontaneous collaboration of strangers in bittorrent which does not require a 'talk page'. What I would have liked to have known is how the 'talk' on these pages allowed networks of 'equal' users to perfect articles on complex topics, and what the users themselves thought of the arrangement.

The poster child of collaboration? A bold statement but is it that far off the truth? Every day Wikipedia helps people around the world find information that is both detailed and related to the topic they have searched. The modern internet is filled with incorrect and purposely misleading information that users can freely access. The user has no idea that the information they are receiving is incorrect so it is quite often trusted. Wikipedia's system of article moderators allows the information to be supplied by anyone but filtered by people considered to be well educated in that chosen field. This means that the information is not as random as other information available throughout World Wide Web. The progression in the Web 2.0 era has been at an exponential rate and Wikipedia has been at the fore front of the revolution as it allows users of the World Wide Web to contribute which is what separates Web 1.0 and web 2.0. So I don't completely agree with the idea that Wikipedia is the poster child of collaboration, however I would suggest that it is the poster child of the Web 2.0 era as it encompasses all that makes the new era so exciting.

I found this article was an interesting read as it discusses Wikipedia's journey in becoming a successful and reliable encyclopedia. While I do consider myself a Wikipedia supporter I did find the article to be incredibly bias in favour of Wikipedia as it speaks extensively with Sue Gardner the Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation. The article does briefly touch on some negative points about Wikipedia in hearing from Robert McHenry, author and former Editor-in-Chief of Encyclopedia Britannica (Wikipedia's largest competitor) but soon turns back in favour of Wikipedia explaining that its scientific articles are of similar accuracy to that of Encyclopedia Britannica (Solon, 2011). As this article suggests, Wikipedia is evermore becoming a reliable source of information however people still seem to question Wikipedia's reliability. Here are somethings that I found in my own research that can suggest people's lack of confidence in Wikipedia's reliability: * Wikipedia articles that cover obscure and unusual topics tend to present more inaccuracies and errors than those covering mainstream topics - this is because obscure topics receive less traffic and therefore there is less likelihood of errors being corrected (Ball, 2007). * Wikipedia is not an accurate representation of a vast and diverse crowd, in fact "the encyclopedia is missing the voices of people in developing countries, women and experts in various specialties that have traditionally been divorced from tech" (Manjoo, 2009). * Wikipedia has in the past been subject to vandalism with hoax and defamatory article updates (Ball, 2007). Reference: Ball, P. (2007, February 27). The more, the wikier. Nature: International weekly journal of Science. Retrieved from http://www.nature.com Manjoo, F. (2009, September 28). Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success? Time Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine Solon, O. (2011, January 11). A Decade of Wikipedia, Th

This article provides quite an interesting overview of Wikipedia and how it started off as a "dirty little secret" for some in the earlier years, with its use progressing to be an "accepted part of daily life in the developed world" ten years after its launch. In addition, higher education facilities (Grossek, 2009; CCNMTL, 2008) and companies (Hendrix & Johannsen, 2008; Hasan & Pfaff, 2006) are beginning to discover the advantages of employing wikis in their respective institutions. We are beginning to see that the 'wisdom of the crowds' and 'knowledge management' are important factors in larger organisations. Thus what once started out as an online encyclopaedia and a "dirty little secret" is now branching out and weaving its way into larger businesses, organisations, and educational institutions. Although Wikipedia has suffered its fair share of editing glitches and is not completely error free, as mentioned in this article, Wikipedia has come a long way since its introduction into the Web 2.0 world and is becoming a more commonly used tool. In addition, it has shown us the effects of the 'wisdom of the crowds' and how collaboration can be so important. Speakers at the New Media in Education Conference (CCNMTL, 2008) note that wikis provide such a valuable communication and collaboration platform that they essentially create a virtual classroom- an interactive platform where students can share ideas, edit documents, and collaborate on group projects. Inevitably I do agree with the title of this paper and think that Wikipedia is "The Poster Child for Collaboration", with Wikipedia and wikis weaving their way into educational institutions (Grossek, 2009; CCNMTL, 2008) and companies (Hendrix & Johannsen, 2008; Hasan & Pfaff, 2006) who use them as a collaborative tool. Additional References: CCNMTL (Nov 3rd, 2008). Promoting Collaborative Learning using Wikis. [YouTube Video]. Retrieved 22nd March 2012 from http://www.yout

Mercea, D. (2012). Digital Prefigurative Participation: The Entwinement of Online Communication and Offline Participation in Protest Events. New Media and Society, 14(1), 153-169. Retrieved March 25, 2012, from Sage Journals Database. http://nms.sagepub.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/content/14/1/153.full.pdf+html In this article, the authors aim to identify the use of computer-mediated communication prior to two offline protests, to determine the role and impact it plays on participants. Social media evidently played a strong role in the recent Arab uprising, but unlike the environmental protests studied in this article, there was a widespread urgency for change influencing the use of online resources. The study included FanFest, an environmental festival supporting change in Romania, and Camp for Climate Change, a traditional and direct style protest involving damage to property and blockades, in the UK (p.158-159). FanFest was considered a low-risk event, and Climate Camp was deemed a high-risk event (p.158), due to the level of activism involved. This article is valuable as it determines a correlation between individuals not associated with any activist organizations and their involvement preceding offline events. The idea that potential activists are more likely to attend low-risk events was reinforced, as a large percentage of people who attended FanFest fit this category (p.159-160). The online organization of the festival attracted new participants, as people were able to discuss the event online and collaborate, by offering suggestions to improve future festivals (p.163). The event aimed to engage the public in environmentalism, rather than demand change, like Climate Camp. This enabled people to freely discuss ideas online, without needing to meet in person. This contrasts with Climate Camp, as many participants d

In this article Mercea (2011, p. 155) observes how computer-mediated-communications are contributing to "participation in protest events run by social movement organisations". He aims to study specifically what role online communication plays in the relationship between online and offline environments in relation to activism. This article ties in well with the Kony 2012 campaign I am currently observing and has strong links to an article I read called 'Online Activism' by Guobin Yang. In the two cases Mercea presents, the power of the crowds mediated through computer-communication allows online activism to occur (Yang, 2009, pp. 33). Through interactions on Web 2.0 outlets, Social Movement Organisations have become a force for social change (Mercea, 2012, p.156). Mercea and Yang both agree on the idea that organisations that utilise Web 2.0 platforms are more successful at harnessing crowds, and in doing so promote discussions, real life meeting points, and ultimately plan towards a groups next step in action. The Invisible Children organisation is classified as a 'Social Organisation Movement' and is a prime example of how computer-mediated-communication combined with Web 2.0 platforms facilitates participation. Interactions on Web 2.0 outlets have allowed the Invisible Children's Kony 2012 campaign to become a force for social change. The Kony 2012 campaign reinforces Mercea's observation that interactions online can encourage activism to cross over into the offline environment. The Invisible Children's action plan, focused for April 20th 2012 dubbed 'Cover the Night', enables audiences to actively become involved with the campaign offline while engaging with it online. The success of the Invisible Children's campaign can be pin-pointed to how it was aimed at a particular audience, reinforced by social media platforms, and most importantly how it has harnessed Web 2.0 tools to deliver the mission of the Kony 2012 campaign, to make J

Manjoo, F. (2009, September 28). Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success? Time Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success? is an article which suggests Wikipedia's achievement level has reached its peak and eventually will see its downfall. The article looks in depth at the potential causes for Wikipedia's slowing growth and how these elements could possibly lead to the community's eventual failure. It suggests one reason for Wikipedia's decelerating growth rate is simply that "the site has hit the natural limit of knowledge expansion" and the only possible remaining contributions are obscure topics and "janitorial" editing job such as formatting and fixing grammar. The article claims "Wikipedia's natural resource is emotion" and editors are motivated by the "rush of joy" they receive when contributing their unique wisdom to an audience of 300 million people. What this means is that as the need for significant edits diminishes, so too does participation enthusiasm. Additionally, as Wikipedia has grown, so too has the bureaucracy and complex laws of Wikipedia, resulting in a community that has become unwelcoming to novice Wikipedians. The article discusses how Wikipedia editors are made up of a narrow class of participants dominated by young males from wealthy countries and academic backgrounds. The Wikipedia author-base is not as broad and diverse as first thought and it seems "the encyclopedia is missing the voices of people in developing countries, women and experts in various specialties that have traditionally been divorced from tech". This too is given as a reason for Wikipedia's imminent downfall.

This article brings up a very interesting idea: the concept of an endpoint for Web 2.0 communities. As the author relates it, this would occur as a Malthusian collapse. Whilst at first glance this seems unfeasible given the infinite expanse of virtual pastures, the article makes some interesting points for consideration: the number of contributors on Wikipedia is dropping and it seems the we have run out of topics to write. It is interesting to compare the Wikipedia community to that of Bittorrent which has found renewed growth, and purpose, in the context of its struggle against copyright laws. Wikipedia has been hailed as a revolutionary form of knowledge democratisation, it is hard to imagine that wikipedians don't share a sense of purpose in their collaboration, and, perhaps even harder to imagine that we are running out of things to write about. Whilst this article is from a highly reputable source, its bias might be considered in following that of the conservative media toward copyleft, this is highlighted by phrases like 'Wikipedia's joyride' which suggests the growth of the site as frivolous. Considering the data it presents, the article is certainly very relevant to an understanding of online collaboration and thought provoking. I cannot help but think that there are still multitudes of topics to be written about, how many contributors, for example, have penned a page for themselves? Whilst ostensibly trivial, this might be the kind of interaction that sees renewed interest in the site and attracts the minority demographics which Gardner says the site needs to make its community richer (p.2). Perhaps the flagging interest in the site comes from the reason that the site is moving too close to the status quo, that as the BitTorrent community has seen, it needs to reminded of its position in an ideological shift.

This article starts with a brief summary of Wikipedia's start. Wikipedia started its work in 2001 and allowed Wikipedia's to contribute and share their articles with others through it. Wikipedia increased its article slowly, in 2008 there were about 2200 articles being added to the Wikipedia every day and in 2009 Wikipedia had about 3 million articles in English. So, Wikipedia broken the record held by Chinese Yongle encyclopedia, which was the famous encyclopedia (Manjoo, 2009). According to my own studies, Wikipedia has different level of articles; they divided to low-, medium- and high quality and different people must play different roles, such as linking, editing and writing. For example, cleaning up other editor's mistake is a very important part, because some people do not add valuable information and some editors must come to increase articles quality and maybe the article needs another editor to correct the article again and this process may need to continue many times to increase quality of that article. However, that does not mean casual users work is not worthy, because, they can absorb more well-rounded contributors to make more valuable articles. To help contributors, University of Arizona suggested Wiki software, which guides contributors to know what should they do, for example, they will aware the article needs more link, references or it needs more editing and writing (Conger, 2010). Conger, C. (2010). Who writes Wikipedia articles? Retrieved from http://news.discovery.com/human/wikipedia-community-articles.html

Jaap van den Herik, H., Postma, E., & Spek, S. (2006). Wikipedia: organisation from a bottom-up approach. Maastricht University. Retrieved 2012, March 19th from http://arxiv.org/pdf/cs/0611068v2.pdf The article Wikipedia: organisation from a bottom-up approach is a study into Wikipedia as a successful self-managing team via the analysis of the Dutch Wikipedia. The study explores how Wikipedia successfully creates a cohesive and logical data structure through bottom-up organisation in which labour division is autonomous. The article suggests that this bottom-up structure, with many contributors working towards a common goal, enables greater speed and efficiency subsequently allowing Wikipedia to update new developments faster than other encyclopedias. Additionally this structure, coupled with the online nature of the information network, encourages more communication and cooperation between divisions, increased enthusiasm in participants, and decreased managerial overheads. In terms of Wikipedia's content organisation, a sample study of Wikipedia articles demonstrated article clustering, scale-freeness, and potentially even small-worldliness indicating that Wikipedia's content is itself an organised network. Finally the article looks into the varying Wikipedia pieces and author types and analyzes their relationship. The study found that articles which receive a low average of edits per author (average of edits = number of edits on an article divided by the number of unique authors on the same article) in general "deal with topic areas that most people have at least some expertise in, or topic areas that everyone claims to know about". Contrastingly articles with a high average of edits per author were generally more specialized topics. What this means is that articles, which cover mainstream topics, attract a larger and more diverse crowd of authors (

Ball, P. (2007, February 27). The more, the wikier. Nature: International weekly journal of Science. Retrieved from http://www.nature.com The More, The Wikier is an article published on Nature: International Weekly Journal of Science, which explores the secret behind the quality of Wikipedia entries when anyone, anywhere has the ability to write and edit content. The article looks at three groups of researchers who "claim to have untangled the process by which many Wikipedia entries achieve their impressive accuracy". Wikipedia is an organisation in which users collaborate their knowledge to create an encyclopedia of information. "The percentage of edits made by the Wikipedia 'élite' of administrators" is steadily declining and "Wikipedia is now dominated by users who are much more numerous than the elite but individually less active." "The wisdom of the crowds" principle suggests that the combined knowledge of a large and diverse group is superior to the knowledge of a few experts. Ball explains that content accuracy and quality of Wikipedia articles is related to a high number of edits by a large number of users. For example, articles that deal with very topical issues receive a higher level of attention from a large and diverse audience and therefore are of higher quality than articles that are not as topical and thus do not attract the same attention. The three research groups referenced in the article are: Dennis Wilkinson and Bernardo Huberman of Hewlett Packard's research laboratories who studied how a high number of edits by a large number of users create the 'best' Wikipedia articles, Aniket Kittur of the University of California, and co-workers who explored how the Wiki community has evolved from a small governing group to a democracy, and Ofer Arazy and colleagues at the University of Alberta who discuss the importance of this diversification of Wikipedia contributors to the overall success of its articles.

This article takes a look at the crowd sourcing idea that Wikipedia thrives on. 'Lots of edits by lots of people'. Crowd sourcing makes use of the knowledge of crowds. The more people you have contributing information to an article the more information the article will contain. This is however affected when fewer people begin to contribute to the writing and collaboration process. A person contributing to the Wikipedia page may only be making a change as small as a simple grammatical correction but it means quite a lot to the overall aesthetic of the page. People are far less likely to believe the information presented by an article filled with errors and punctuation problems. It might seem like a small issue but this is how many hands make light work. Wikipedia's reliability comes from its ability to be edited by many people with small alterations. It is strange however that in your other article regarding Wikipedia being its own worst enemy you have points made there of why Wikipedia is leaning towards extinction. These mainly are concerned with the decreasing number of people editing. So is Wikipedia going to stay strong or will it slowly become just another encyclopedia?

Ball's article highlights the successful nature of Wikipedia's open source network and how quality of information is achieved. He suggests that the 'secret' to Wikipedia's credibility is the increasing number of contributors and the 'diversification' it brings to the platform through collective knowledge (Ball, 2007). I can relate Ball's article to Surowiecki's (2004) article Wisdom of the Crowds because it reinforces the notion that people must be unrelated, independent, and have diversity of mind from one another to form good opinions. The architecture of the collaborative platform Wikipedia harnesses the 'power of the crowds' in such a way that encourages diverse participation, as opposed to a group-think scenario, and thus produces 'wisdom' through quality information (Surowiecki, 2004, p5). Ball observes that Wikipedia's structure allows for an above average quality of information on more topical articles. This occurs because popular topics create more traffic, which in turn enables more contributors to edit an article and therefore creating more 'diverse' and 'reliable' information (Ball, 2007). This reinforces the quality of an article through diversification and mass collaboration. This notion of 'quality' can be applied to the Kony 2012 campaign page on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kony_2012), which has been edited over 500 times and has been viewed 1,227,982 times since 6 March 2012, when the Kony 2012 campaign was first launched (Wikipedia Article Page Statistics, 2012). However, it is at this point that the similarities between Ball and Surowiecki cease. According to Ball, the Kony 2012 Wikipedia article is a prime example of a topical issue. The statistics reinforce his observations about Wikipedia's crowds and how they are able to create credible and reliable information due to diversification brought into the article by 1,227,98

This is an extremely interesting article as it focuses on the ways in which wikis have excelled in enticing people into contributing and exciting them about making contributions. Businesses and organizations can learn a lot from this article as it also illustrates ways in which a wiki can be used to increase the rate, amount and quality of contribution. The precise nature of Wikipedia is one of the greatest advantages it has over other information sources. People looking for information find their topic and the information provided is in a formatted style that is maintained throughout the site. The limited security measures on Wikipedia allow people to contribute what they wish with minimal restrictions. The question is however can a wiki such as Wikipedia be used effectively to add value and increase collaboration within a business environment? Wikipedia does allow users to contribute information and remove the barriers and restrictions of both geographic and social status. This can allow bias or ill-informed information to be present in articles. Within a business structure there is little to no chance of purposely misleading information being presented to the articles. This does remove one of the major problems that Wikipedia faces as the integrity of information is assured. So with this in mind does a wiki remain a great resource for collaboration within a business environment?

Overall, this article provides a nice summary of how businesses and corporations can employ wikis in their knowledge production, highlighting some of the advantages and disadvantages and discussing some troubleshooting problems. Yeo (2010) notes that an added benefit of using wikis in businesses is that multiple people can work on a document at once, allowing multiple editors to work on different sections of the wiki at the same time. However where companies may struggle is with the layout and formatting of the page. Hasan and Pfaff (2006) note that IBM, the Disney Corporation, and British Telecommunications are just some of the major corporations that have successfully implemented the use of wikis into their business structure. The Shell Corporation is yet another business that has successfully employed the use of wikis in their organisation (Hendrix & Johannsen, 2008). Similarly, the revision history and ability to track editing changes made to pages is a common advantage running across all of these studies. Although this article offers a nice description of how wikis can be used in businesses, it does not delve into the world of knowledge management and using wikis as a knowledge sharing platform, as discussed by Hasan and Pfatt (2006). They also fail to provide strategies to motivate employees to make use of the wiki and participate in knowledge contribution, as mentioned by Hendrix and Johannsen (2008). Nevertheless, the article makes us aware about wikis and how they can be incorporated in businesses, noting some of the advantages and limitations. Additional References: Hasan, H., & Pfaff, C.C. (2006). The wiki: an environment to revolutionise employees' interaction with corporate knowledge. OZCHI. 11(24-26). Pp377-380. Retrieved 19th March 2012 from http://www.ozchi.org/proceedings/2006/sessions/short-papers/social/hasan-p377.pdf Hendrix, D., & Johannsen, G. (May 16th, 2008). A knowledge sharing and collaboration platform. Inside Knowledg

This article related to my topic discussed about how Wikipedia as one of the popular online collaborative encyclopedias allows everyone to write and read its article for free and there are large numbers of businesses all around the world who edit and publish its articles (Yeo, 2010). According to my own studies, Wikipedia will be good for small businesses? Wikipedia as a popular online community can help small businesses to have an article there. Of course, everyone can make a page in Wikipedia, but, having a page for businesses can bring more customers for them, for example, Zip's Drive-In has article in Wikipedia which gives information to people about its fast foods. Tekserve, sales Apple products in New York, has a Wikipedia article to gives beneficial information about their new products and absorb them on their own blog. Or even "Hollywood-based Roscoe's House of Chicken and Waffles" has article in Wikipedia (Mcgee, 2009). But why businesses want to have an article in Wikipedia? They can have great exposure of their new products: when a company has article in Wikipedia that means more people all over the world can read their information that brings them more exposure. They can manage their information and their through Wikipedia and people know Wikipedia as a trustable resource. Moreover, Wikipedia gives permission to businesses to update their articles, and with the help of Talk page they can read customers wishes and suggestion (Mcgee, 2009). However, businesses must aware there in Wikipedia there will be some angry customers and they may edit their articles, so, businesses should aware to correct any untruthful information which added by others and it is a truth that monitoring can be very time-consuming for them (Mcgee, 2009). Mcgee, M. (17 september 2009). Should a small business have a Wikipedia article? Available online at: http://www.smallbusinesssem.com/should-small-business-have-wikipedia-article/2311/

Torrent etiquette is more than just good manners, it is a tool by which bittorrent sites promote collaboration and organisation between users. Torrent etiquette has many faces, it is frequently a formal mechanism such as seeding ratios needed to stay on site or the instructions of Admin on discussion boards, yet it is also something which users proliferate themselves purely through the course of interaction. Etiquette allows bittorrent communities to solidify user collaboration. There are 1,090,000 results for 'torrent etiquette' on google, this page presents one net user's guide to the subject. That bittorrent has evolved to the point of having a widely understood etiquette says something: strangers need just a very basic framework to be able to come and work together collaboratively. Before, people would download individually, now, with a little guidance a group of people from all over the world, with different intents, schedules and backgrounds can work as a coherent entity, each individual not only gaining his or her needs but contributing to the needs of the group. Aside from some specific information on ratios and multiple accounts, Brooks' advice is very simple, "If someone uploads something you happen to like, click the thanks button. If there's a forum, say hi. If a tracker has a list of requests to fill then see how you can help out." Etiquette provides boundaries to the crowd and by looking closely at its form we see that its is very close to the ethics we live by in day to day life. Thus, we realise the power the internet has in connecting people and concatenating the work of individuals into that of an organisation. References Brookes, T. (2010). Torrent Etiquette: How to avoid getting banned from private trackers . Retrieved 20th March from http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/bittorrent-etiquette-avoid-banned-private-trackers/.

This page, rather than looking mostly at rules like my articles, also addresses etiquette, at least for private torrent trackers. Although some of the etiquette described could be applied to public torrent trackers, it is mostly relevant only to the more exclusive private torrent trackers. Rather than this being a weakness of this page for the subject, it is useful to note that fair use and courtesy by people using BitTorrent is much more likely to happen in smaller communities, and doesn't necessarily apply to BitTorrent as a whole. The collaboration that occurs through BitTorrent becomes more like collaboration when it is governed by these kinds of social interactions between users in the same private community. This page mentions ways which users can help out other individuals, for example by looking at someone's list of requests, or hitting a "thanks" button on someone's torrent. These seem much more specifically collaborative interactions than what occurs through the actual BitTorrent downloading process, where everything is automatic. Overall this is an interesting page, but I would suggest keeping in mind that the etiquette described doesn't apply directly to all BitTorrent activity. Many users going through public torrent trackers likely don't feel any kind of reason to observe any of this etiquette and will share what the protocols of BitTorrent make them share.

Like the many articles that I looked at a few weeks ago, Brookes gives us a brief introduction into how private tracking helps to create mechanisms for interaction and how these websites promote a good social etiquette and overall community for users. He shows a similar opinion to many others in that people do not require much in order to feel part of a community. According to Brookes, the introduction of communities to the bit torrent world, has taken away the more individualistic downloader. Through the private trackers it has seen these collaborative communities sprout up and instead of individuals selfishly downloading for themselves they are now working and contributing for others and are helping the whole group function. His overall belief that the etiquette element of these communities is key and that if they are to function properly, that each person should be willing to help out when required. As I mentioned, many of the other articles that I reviewed, for example Incentives in Bit Torrent Induce Free Riding (2005) written by Jun, S., Ahamad are of a similar opinion that private trackers are improving the communal and collaborative features of bit torrent and have made it something that people are encouraged and enticed to participate in.

Krebs, B. (2012). Twitter bots target Tibetan protests. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved on March 24, 2012 from http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/security-it/twitter-bots-target-tibetan-protests-20120322-1vl5h.html This news article examines the emerging use of Twitter bots to hinder and thwart political protest. Twitter bots are automated Twitter accounts that auto-follow and send junk tweets that can jam up a Twitter feed. The news article covers the current political unrest in Tibet where dissidents are using the social media tool Twitter to protest their suppression under Chinese rule. Popular Tibetan hash tags used by the protesters are being targeted by these Twitter bots and effectively rendered useless as they are flooded with meaningless tweets. The author reports that this practice of online suppression was also put into use by pro-government forces during the disputed parliamentary elections in Russia last year, where anti-Kremlin tweets were diluted by the inundation of automated pro-government messages. This article shows the challenges being faced by political protesters using Twitter as its strength as a message platform is being subverted and used against them. It also highlights how governments can avoid taking the extreme action of shutting down Twitter in their country, and the negative backlash this would bring, and instead leaving it open for their own ends. And whilst the author notes that Twitter did crack down on the events in Russia, it remains to be seen what action, if any, will be taken in Tibet and what actions the protesters themselves can take to circumnavigate this threat.

This article reveals an emergence of spam-bots and pro-governmental forces using social media to suppress political activism. It is ironic that this liberating technology that provides activists with an outlet to report, communicate and collaborate information, is being used against them to prevent further protesting. Clearly, this news report is of great value towards the discussion of political activism because most articles appear to discuss the way in which protesters have harnessed the web to their advantage. Yet, there is evidence to suggest that the government, or at least pro-governmental supporters, are using the same technology to interfere with events. Tibetan protestors were using Twitter as a tool in their stand against Chinese rule. It follows suit of the successful Arab Revolution, by organizing the dissemination of information and reports with the tags #tibet and #freetibet (Krebs, 2012). However, it took a turn for the worst when spam-bots started flooding these hashtags with meaningless information to break down the means of communication for protestors (Krebs, 2012). This shares similarities with the methods used by the Iranian government to spread misinformation to protestors, by manipulating the technology to their own advantage (Grossman, 2009). The authorities infiltration of Twitter appears to be an effortless solution to thwart political protest, rather than completely shutting down access to the Internet. Whilst this has the potential to endanger the lives of citizens, people are quick to recognize the difference between bots and genuine people, as other users were warned to be wary of new Twitter accounts spreading misinformation in Iran (Grossman, 2009). Clearly, this article is highly relevant to the topic and appears to be a reliable source. It discusses an aspect of political protesting that has had little to no coverage in the broader mainstream media and academic papers. Reference: Grossm

Chatora, A. (2012). Encouraging Political Participation in Africa: The Potential of Social Media Platforms. Institute for Security Studies. Retrieved March 22, 2012 from http://www.iss.co.za/uploads/15Mar2012SocialMedia.pdf This situation report is from the Institute for Security Studies (a pan-African applied policy research institute based in South Africa), and examines the role of social media in facilitating political participation. It uses as its catalyst the recent popular protests dubbed the 'Arab Spring' to explore the possibility of an 'African Spring' protest movement. The report includes case studies on several African countries highlighting difficulties faced by different countries utilising social media, which includes historical experiences, institutional arrangements and socioeconomic and political conditions. Of note are the actions taken in Cameroon where the government blocked the Twitter service for ten days during the Arab Spring protests for reasons of 'national security', and in Uganda when the 'walk-to-work' protests were successfully initiated by protest groups making use of social media such as Twitter, the government suspended the use of social networks causing 'walk-to-work' protests to lose their momentum. The report concludes that despite the severe challenges facing Africans in taking up social media, that ultimately "engaging with these platforms will allow citizens to circumvent the wide range of tactics used to stifle public opinion". I find this report to be a valuable resource as it explores the current environment, requirements, and limitations within Africa for movements to successfully incorporate social media such as Twitter into their political protests.

This article discusses the potential for political protests in African nations, in light of the recent activism in Arab countries. I found this article beneficial, as it clearly highlights the profound difficulties that are faced in some African nations, and discusses elements that are not covered in other articles related to the topic. An element of particular importance was the consideration of historical context when investigating the potential for political activism, both online and offline. The widespread poverty and clear digital divide between some people in Africa, is of significance as many choose to engage in activities of survival, rather than that of political action (Chatora, 2012, p.4). Computer literacy skills and the willingness of people to disobey controlling governments must also be considered, as people in Angola have shown no signs of retreating from political discussion and the organization of protests online, compared to people in Cameroon and Zimbabwe who are facing various difficulties against repressive regimes (Chatora, 2012, p.9-10). The importance of historical context clearly resonates with the article I discussed - "Protest 2.0: Online Interactions and Aboriginal Activists." The Aboriginal activists were uncomfortable with using new technology, due to a lack of computer literacy, as well as, the evident interference it made with the historical context of communication in their culture, as visual storytelling is favoured over the written word used online (Petray, 2011, p.927). This article adds value to the discussion of political activism as it is of great relevance to the topic and appears to be a reliable source of information. Whilst it does comment on various elements not covered in other articles, it also highlights an area of significance regarding the uptake of social media in African nations - clearly implying that there will be future developments in this area of research. Reference: Petray, T.L. (20

The introduction of this chapter captivated me because it defined that Youtube is not just a media space for user to consume media but it acts as a platform that provides social networking framework which enable young people to create and share original content while making social connection virtually. This article explains how Youtube has created a participatory culture within young people. The easy and interactive features in Youtube have enabled young people to be pro-active within the online community. By collaborating online through Youtube, young people can express their identity through their creativity, seek support from peers (either from family, close friend or even strangers who have similar interest), learn new skills by watching other people tutorial and engage in public space.  To understand how Youtube enables participatory culture, this article provides thorough explanations on how the framework is supported. There are five different characteristics that form participatory culture in Youtube, these are: low barrier of artistic expression and civic engagement, strong support for creating and sharing project, informal setting of mentorship, belief of the importance of contributions and a sense of social connection. These characteristics illustrate how Youtube users especially young people engage to communicate and exchange ideas with other users virtually. 

Source: Chau, C. (2010), YouTube as a participatory culture. New Directions for Youth Development, 2010: 65-74. Available online at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/yd.376/pdf

I found the statistical information in this article very revealing and insightful. But I did find it hard to place within the overall topic. The ability for youth to 'explore identity' and 'acquire new skills' as the article states, are themes that seem to be synonymous when youth cultures are in focus. With this in mind I would assume that this article has relevance to the Knowledge Production and Higher Education topic. I was particularly interested when the article explained the affects that commenting on videos and video view counts can have on video production. As they highlight 'feedback interactions' are crucial to motivating users to create new content. This could either be a new video or increasing circulation of a video with in the community. Just recently there has been a lot of focus on adolescent users of you tube in the media (3 high school girls suspended due to a video they uploaded to youTube). It is no wonder that the participatory nature, or non- participatory (viewing but not creating or commenting) nature of youTube appeals so much to a youth culture. YouTube simply provides a non-confrontation space where youth can determine their own level of participation enabling it to be used as tools for knowledge production and Higher Education. However as the ability for videos to go viral increases and the frontiers of social media expand, I worry the 'empowerment' of youthTubers isn't being backed up by public broadcasting education and as with all higher education, there needs to be a basic level of knowledge already in place and a set of standards.

Petray, T.L. (2011). Protest 2.0: Online Interactions and Aboriginal Activists. Media, Culture and Society, 33(6), 923-940. Retrieved March 25, 2012, from Sage Journals Database. http://mcs.sagepub.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/content/33/6/923.full.pdf+html This article conveys, that while it is necessary to utilize the tools made available by the digital age, they "should be used to enhance offline activism, rather than to replace it" (p.936). The author has studied an Aboriginal community in Townsville, and the difficulties that activists have faced in gaining momentum in a digital space. Unlike the young tech-savvy protestors in the Arab uprising, or the destructive youths in the London riots, the participants in this community are older and not comfortable with new technology. In this remote community, emails have been favoured when conveying information and organizing meetings online (p.927). However, this has caused difficulties in the disjointed fragmentation of messages, as well as, interfering with a culture that values visual storytelling over the written word (p.930; 927). Similar to, Climate Camp in the UK, the community may have benefited from using some Internet tools, however, face-to-face meetings were found to be more effective when collaborating and organising events. To further their presence online, the group created a Facebook page, allowing people to donate money and support them. However, the lack of success in gaining political momentum is linked to the participants and the current nature of online activism. Whilst the page can facilitate collaboration and organisation, it lost its momentum in the lack of group activity and recent updates (p.933). Due to the current nature of online activism, people can simply 'like' a page or sign a petition to show their support towards a cause, with little to no effort (p

Whilst I totally agreed with the concluding points of this article I found it very hard to identify just which topic this article had the greatest relevance to. It is a reliable source as it is associated with the James Cook University and the author has positioned themselves within the community they are researching. I could draw similarities with one of my articles, Public Radio's Social Media Experiments: Risk, Opportunity, Challenge, (Levenshus, 2007) in that they both reference a resistance to social media opportunities. The reasons for this 'resistance' in both articles could be put down to a lack of knowledge, resource allocation and institutional culture or 'cultural explainations' (Petray, 2011, p. 927). The understanding that 'push-button activism' was more of a feeling of evolvement rather than the translation of any 'real participation', supports the articles offer of a resolution. Any negative ideals about cyber-activism are squashed by the simple resolution of combining offline infrastructures with the online and not just relying on either one. Overall I thought this article was a breath of fresh air. Whilst I realise that 'cyber-activism' has been in the spotlight a lot lately due to the Kony 2012 campaign, I was delighted to read an article that turns its attention to local activism. Aboriginal cultures have always maintained my interest and just recently I viewed the 'Tall Man' exhibition that dealt with the Palm Island death in custody referred to in the article. It had a profound affect on me. I also appreciate that preserving oral histories and the rite to communicate in ones own language has deeply embedded social issues within Australia. This is another reason why this articles direct referencing of Aboriginal activism is refreshing and of great value. Equal access to social technologies is so very important in closing the digital divide both globally and locally. As the article points out only '25%' of the globe have such access (P

Reference: Levenshus, A. 2007. Public Radios Social Media Experiments: Risk, Opportunity, Challenge. Retrieved from http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/sites/default/files/public_radio_report3.pdf