From Wikinomics to Government 2.0
"You don't need to have a Facebook account, or to have edited a Wikipedia entry, to understand that the Web is in another highly disruptive period. Online tools under the rubric Web 2.0 are changing how information flows, with social networks letting people communicate directly with one another. This is reversing the top-down, one-way approach to communications that began with Gutenberg, challenging everything from how bosses try to manage to how consumers make or break products with instant mass feedback.
The institution that has most resisted new ways of doing things is the biggest one of all: government. This is about to change, with public-sector bureaucracies the new target for Web innovators." (reg. req.) [RJ]
Coolest Technologies Demoed at Web 2.0
Clint Boulton reviews six of the more memorable technologies demoed at Web 2.0 on eWeek.com. Most are online collaboration tools. [JH]
Web 2.0 Expo San Francisco 2008 Starts Today
The four-day Web 2.0 Expo San Francisco 2008 starts today [website]. Check out the Annotated Schedule of Programs and the offical Web 2.0 Expo Blog. Information Week will be providing on-going coverage of the event here. Follow news and blog coverage: Google News Search | Google Blog Search [JH]
Web 2.0 and Privacy
Legal experts again raised their concerns that the rise of Web 2.0 has come at the expense of individual privacy. This time at the Legal Futures Conference; read more about it on c|net: To be anonymous or not to be, that is the privacy question
Related c|net coverage of Stanford's Legal Futures Conference:
Internet Privacy and Web 2.0
The recent kerfluffle about Facebook’s beacon has gotten Karen A. Coombs, Head of Web Services at the University of Houston Libraries, thinking about Web 2.0 and privacy issues. Read her interesting post on Library Web Chic. [JH]
How to be a New Media Douchebag
Top Five Sites Covering Web 2.0 Developments
"There are several sites and blogs that cover the social networking scene. Here are Pandia’s favorites."
Created by Kansas State University cultural anthropologist Michael Wesch, producer of "The Machine is Us/ing Us," this video explores the changes in the way we find, store, create, critique, and share information. This video was created as a conversation starter, and works well when brainstorming with people about the near future and the skills needed in order to harness, evaluate, and create information effectively. Recommended for use in information literacy lectures. [JH]
A Librarian’s Guide to Creating Web 2.0 Subject Guides
"The New Web has brought with it some amazing tools for creating online subject guides. These tools offer the addition of multimedia and multi-format elements such as photos, videos, social bookmarks, RSS feeds, and widgets to traditional resource guides, as well as an interactive dimension which makes them particularly 2.0. Here are a few tools for creating your own 2.0 guides. Got any other ideas for subject guides? Please share them in the comments!"
The Machine is Us/ing Us
This very interesting and well-known video was created by Kansas State University cultural anthropologist Michael Wesch
In this clip, Prof. Wesch explains his thoughts behind "The Machine is Us/ing Us", how he came to the idea, how he did it and how surprised he was about the effects on his life, his work and the web community. [JH]
Web 2.0 and the Uninitiated
A recent post to this blog addresses the question, What is Web 2.0? Indeed, it "is more than a set of 'cool' new technologies and services." But what about those technologies and services? Who explains them to the unitiated? What if you are one of the unitiated? No doubt, teaching is an ever-expanding role for law librarians, one that further integrates us into our parent institutions. Often, this role includes teaching technologies and technology services. So, thoughts of teaching and Web 2.0 merged in my mind when I recently accessed the 7 Things you Should Know About series from Educause. The series offers concise, two-page explanations of wikis, Facebook, YouTube, virtual worlds, open journaling, Twitter, and much more. Take a look at these to see how they may help you with instructing others, or yourself. [MM]
Editor's Note: With this post, I am delighted to announce that Matt Morrison has joined Law X.0 as a co-editor. Matt, Research Attorney and Lecturer in Law, Cornell Law Library, has worked in law libraries since 1996. He really enjoys teaching and discovering the new ways in which students learn. Matt is also a regular contributor to Cornell Law Library's InSite which his library allows us to republish. Joe Hodnicki
Will Web 2.0 Create a Legal Tsunami?
Eric Barbry has deposited Web 2.0: Nothing Changes... but Everything is Different in SSRN. Here's the abstract:
For some, Web 2.0 is a simple evolution of the current web; for others, Web 2.0 is a real revolution. Web 2.0 is, in fact, a revolutionary evolution. Technically speaking, Web 2.0 is a simple evolution because it is not a technical breakthrough, as it is essentially based on an aggregation of existing technologies. However, the impact of Web 2.0 is such that it can actually be described as an evolution that will shake our sociological, economic and legal bases. This paper addresses the legal aspects of Web 2.0 and tries to explain that while Web 2.0 is not a lawless domain, it is highly likely to create a legal tsunami.
The Web 2.0 Predicament: Making the Web Inaccessible Again?
The IT predicament occurs when a new technology that is designed to empower many places other potential users at a disadvantage because the technology is found to be unaccommodating. One readily apparent example is the widepread use of the PDF file format to distribute documents. Unless properly tagged (and the vast majority are not), the PDF file format cannot be read by the blind using JAWS.
Now, please take a moment to imagine the predicaments created by Web 2.0 and then view these video presentations. [JH]
Cyndi Rowland, Ph.D.
Executive Director, WebAIM
Center for Persons with Disabilities
Utah State University
Abstract: Individuals with disabilities have struggled over the past two decades to gain access to Web content; content that powerfully predicts academic and employment success. As the field moves to new technologies (e.g., AJAX) what are the likely outcomes for individuals who struggle to gain basic access? Dr. Rowland will discuss the experiences of individuals with disabilities as they attempt to gain access to current content. She will forward the argument that there are many reasons why developers should keep Web accessibility in mind now and in the future. One of those reasons is that from a technologic standpoint, it is the smart thing to do.
Director of Web Services
State University of New York at Buffalo
Abstract:The next generation web has arrived. Social Networks, User-Created Content, Rich Media, and the Mobile Web are now part of the landscape. What does this mean for Web Accessibility?
Web 2.0, Two Years and a Day Later
The term "Web 2.0" became popular in tech circles following the first O'Reilly Media's Web 2.0 conference in 2004. On September 30, 2005, Tim O'Reilly wrote a piece summarizing the subject "for the rest of us," What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software. Download oreilly_web20.pdf Today, we celebrate the two-year anniversary of the popularization of "Web 2.0" (albeit one day late).
Web 2.0 Principles and Best Practices by John Musser with Tim O'Reilly and the O'Reilly Radar Team ($395 | November 2006 | 101 pages | ISBN 0-596-52769-1) laid out the terrain. From the book description:
Web 2.0 is here today—and yet its vast, disruptive impact is just beginning. More than just the latest technology buzzword, it's a transformative force that's propelling companies across all industries towards a new way of doing business characterized by user participation, openness, and network effects.
Unfortunately, at $395 a copy, many of us couldn't afford to buy this report. Dion Hinchcliffe, however, did provide an excellent summary of the report at the time.
With the jaundiced eye of a one-time stock trader, I viewed O'Reilly's early Web 2.0 promotions as a prelude to Internet Bubble II. Luckily, Big Money stayed on the sidelines; Web 2.0 looked too much like Web 1.0. I pretty much ignored the buzz then despite the fact that I had already co-founded with Cincinnati Law Prof Paul Caron the Law Professor Blogs Network in the Summer of 2004 and launched Law Librarian Blog on January 1, 2005.
What is Web 2.0? I'll leave that up to you to decide. See generally Wikipedia's Web 2.0 entry and Whatis?com's Web 2.0. O'Reilly's "Web 2.0" has it's share of critics. In a July 28, 2006 podcast interview for IBM [transcript] Web founder Sir Tim Berners-Lee expressed doubts that Web 2.0 was any different from Web 1.0. Nate Anderson, Tim Berners-Lee on Web 2.0: "nobody even knows what it means," ars technica (September 01, 2006).
In November 2005, Paul Grahman wrote
Does "Web 2.0" mean anything? Till recently I thought it didn't, but the truth turns out to be more complicated. Originally, yes, it was meaningless. Now it seems to have acquired a meaning. And yet those who dislike the term are probably right, because if it means what I think it does, we don't need it.
See also Jeffrey Zeldman's Web 3.0 (January 16, 2006) and Wil Arndt's Web 2.0 is Bull, or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Web 2.0 (June 5, 2006).
Despite the critics, Web 2.0 must exist. Why? Just listen to the buzz. "Web 2.0" has drowned out it's critics. First, there's O'Reilly's annual Web 2.0 Summit. Attended by the Internet elite, the latest summit is coming up Oct. 17-19, 2007 in San Francisco.
Third, Google's CEO is already defining Web 3.0 while, as recently as December 10, 2006, Tim O'Reilly was still trying to define Web 2.0 in Web 2.0 Compact Definition: Trying Again. See also Alex Iskold, Web 3.0: When Web Sites Become Web Services.
Finally, librarians have been writing about it; Web 2.0 has morphed into Librarian 2.0 and Library 2.0. See, for example, Library 2.0 Guides. Meredith Farkas, author of my favorite book on the subject, Social Software in Libraries, has some interesting things to say on the subject at Do we need a translator here? on her great blog, Information Wants To Be Free, including the following:
I think most people who are into this stuff, me included, fall into the “Pragmatists” category. We are big technology fans, but we understand that these tools should only be used in libraries to fill needs. We realize that not all of our patrons are tech-savvy and that many of them have needs that can’t be filled by 2.0 technologies. We know that any time we focus on a 2.0 technology, we take time and resources away from something else, so we must carefully prioritize our technology use at work. Pragmatists manage to be both excited and skeptical.
Today. So where does this long and winding post lead us? To the best report I have read on the subject: Paul Anderson's What is Web 2.0? Ideas, Technologies and Implications for Education (Feb. 2007) (pdf). From the introduction:
The report establishes that Web 2.0 is more than a set of 'cool’ and new technologies and services, important though some of these are. It has, at its heart, a set of at least six powerful ideas that are changing the way some people interact. Secondly, it is also important to acknowledge that these ideas are not necessarily the preserve of ‘Web 2.0’, but are, in fact, direct or indirect reflections of the power of the network: the strange effects and topologies at the micro and macro level that a billion Internet users produce. This might well be why Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the creator of the World Wide Web, maintains that Web 2.0 is really just an extension of the original ideals of the Web that does not warrant a special moniker. However, business concerns are increasingly shaping the way in which we are being led to think and potentially act on the Web and this has implications for the control of public and private data. Indeed, Tim O’Reilly’s original attempt to articulate the key ideas behind Web 2.0 was focused on a desire to be able to benchmark and therefore identify a set of new, innovative companies that were potentially ripe for investment. The UK HE sector should debate whether this is a long-term issue and maybe delineating Web from Web 2.0 will help us to do that.
As with other aspects of university life the library has not escaped considerable discussion about the potential change afforded by the introduction of Web 2.0 and social media. One of the key objectives of the report is to examine some of the work in this area and to tease out some of the key elements of ongoing discussions. For example, the report argues that there needs to be a distinction between concerns around quality of service and ‘user-centred change’ and the services and applications that are being driven by Web 2.0 ideas. This is particularly important for library collection and preservation activities and some of the key questions for libraries are: is the content produced by Web 2.0 services sufficiently or fundamentally different to that of previous Web content and, in particular, do its characteristics make it harder to collect and preserve? Are there areas where further work is needed by researchers and library specialists? The report examines these questions in the light of the six big ideas as well as the key Web services and applications, in order to review the potential impact of Web 2.0 on library services and preservation activities.
Tomorrow. We relaunch this blog tomorrow as Law X.0 to cover news, resources and information about developments in web communications, knowledge management, information technology, and education technology as they apply (or can potentially apply) to the legal academy. Law blogs will continue to be an important focus of this blog but in the broader context of Web X.0. Individuals interested in contributing to this blog are invited to contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org. [JH]
In Why We Twitter: Understanding Microblogging, Akshay Java and Tim Finin of the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, and Xiaodan Song and Belle Tseng of NEC Laboratories America analyze user intentions associated with Twittering. From the introduction:
Microblogging is a new form of communication in which users can describe their current status in short posts distributed by instant messages, mobile phones, email or the Web. Twitter, a popular microblogging tool has seen a lot of growth since it launched in October, 2006. In this paper, we present our observations of the microblogging phenomena by studying the topological and geographical properties of Twitter’s social network.
See also Deconstructing Twitter. [JH]
The Challenges Corporate Media Face
ZDNet’s David Berlind has published Get ready for the 'Twitterization' of mainstream media. In addition to examining microblogging, Berlind summarizes the challenges facing corporate media as it is forced to compete with bloggers, podcasters and video podcasters. [JH]
Amateurs R Us
"Millions and millions of exuberant monkeys ... are creating an endless digital forest of mediocrity." -- Andrew Keen.
List Price: $22.95
Hardcover: 240 pages
Publisher: Currency (June 5, 2007)
Book Description: Amateur hour has arrived, and the audience is running the show
In a hard-hitting and provocative polemic, Silicon Valley insider and pundit Andrew Keen exposes the grave consequences of today’s new participatory Web 2.0 and reveals how it threatens our values, economy, and ultimately the very innovation and creativity that forms the fabric of American achievement.
Our most valued cultural institutions, Keen warns—our professional newspapers, magazines, music, and movies—are being overtaken by an avalanche of amateur, user-generated free content. Advertising revenue is being siphoned off by free classified ads on sites like Craigslist; television networks are under attack from free user-generated programming on YouTube and the like; file-sharing and digital piracy have devastated the multibillion-dollar music business and threaten to undermine our movie industry. Worse, Keen claims, our “cut-and-paste” online culture—in which intellectual property is freely swapped, downloaded, remashed, and aggregated—threatens over 200 years of copyright protection and intellectual property rights, robbing artists, authors, journalists, musicians, editors, and producers of the fruits of their creative labors.
In today’s self-broadcasting culture, where amateurism is celebrated and anyone with an opinion, however ill-informed, can publish a blog, post a video on YouTube, or change an entry on Wikipedia, the distinction between trained expert and uninformed amateur becomes dangerously blurred. When anonymous bloggers and videographers, unconstrained by professional standards or editorial filters, can alter the public debate and manipulate public opinion, truth becomes a commodity to be bought, sold, packaged, and reinvented.
The very anonymity that the Web 2.0 offers calls into question the reliability of the information we receive and creates an environment in which sexual predators and identity thieves can roam free. While no Luddite—Keen pioneered several Internet startups himself—he urges us to consider the consequences of blindly supporting a culture that endorses plagiarism and piracy and that fundamentally weakens traditional media and creative institutions.
Offering concrete solutions on how we can reign in the free-wheeling, narcissistic atmosphere that pervades the Web, The Cult of the Amateur is a wake-up call to each and every one of us.
About the Author: Andrew Keen is a Silicon Valley entrepreneur whose writings on culture, media, and technology have appeared in The Weekly Standard, Fast Company, The San Francisco Chronicle, Listener, and Jazziz. As the Founder, President and CEO of Audiocafe.com, he has been featured in Esquire, Industry Standard, and many other magazines and newspapers. He is the host of the acclaimed Internet show AfterTV and frequently appears on radio and television. He lives in Berkeley, California.
Editor's Note: Yes, I cut and pasted this from Amazon.com. [JH]