DIY online communities are experiencing a rise in popularity, more and more users are breaking out of their passive role as a consumer and towards becoming a 'produser'. The term produser has been discussed in great detail by Axel Bruns an author on many books related to users shifting away from their passive roles as consumers and onto a more active role as a produser.
In a produsage environment there is no one fixed content creator the traditional concepts of production have dispersed. A produsage web site of information is continually being edited making it a never finished product. This notion of something never being finished has a negative ring to it, but when compairing an encyclopedia bought from the book shop as opposed to an online encyclopedia such as Wikipedia, users have up to date information right at their finger tips, once a book is printed there is no opportunity to add additional information unless the book is to be republished as a second addition, in this case information becomes out dated and in some cases irrelevant. Online produsers continually update information weather it be a paragraph, a page of just correction of grammer mistakes. Web sites similar to Wikipedia are concerned with provision of services rather than making a product.
The idea of users working together online to collate a document or information resource, means that the document and ownership is shared. Who is it that holds the copywrite for published work on Wikipedia? Everybody that has been contributing as an active user. This means that there is no need for liscencing or for people to spend money to access information, it is readly there at the click of a mouse button.
Every participator is a potentially important cotributer, but what happens if incorrect facts, or resources are added? There is a theory that produsers in their diverse masses will edit out inaccurate information. Being able to publish easily does leave some problems for deliberate sabotage of resources, hence the reason why Wikipedia is a good resource for initially finding out about a topic but it is good academic practice to cross check with a number or other resources to ensure correct data is being used.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Your descriptions and examples of produsage are very detailed. I found your discussion regarding incorrect information being published on Wikipedia interesting.
I personally do not think that too many errors come up in Wikipedia as there are many people who check new additions and edits for errors and inconsistencies. For example,
studies on 42 articles in Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica by experts found that the Wikipedia articles had an average of 4 errors whilst Britannica had 3. Often vandalism of pages occur on Wikipedia but this is usually combated quickly by other users blocking further edits on the page.
Therefore, I believe the Wikipedia community are efficient and exceptionally qualified at submitting and changing articles, especially when compared to an encyclopedia published by an organisation. Most people who create Wikipedia articles would be experts in their field, based on the level of quality and depth seen in many articles, however one can not be too sure as the articles aren't owned by anyone.
I agree with your claim that Wikipedia is primarily a good place for introductory information on a topic as it is not suitable for academic reference and the occasional error can be found. The external links section at the bottom of most Wikipedia entries are useful for further information on a topic.
Post a Comment