Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Will uni ever end ... ??
This is a call out to any students who are feeling my pain? I am in my final year of a double degree (BBus/BCI) and it feels like I am standing still in time. Will uni ever end? That is my question!? If anyone has any advice on how to survive the grind of uni, please oh please leave me a comment.
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Wikipedia: the implications of open-content technology
Introduction of Wikipedia
Wikipedia is fast becoming one of the most frequented sites in modern-day Internet usage. Wikipedia, as defined by Lih (2004) is “an Internet-based, user contributed encyclopedia that is collaboratively edited, and utilizes the wiki concept – the idea that any user on the Internet can change any page within the Web site, even anonymously”. Lih outlines the irony seen in Wikipedia’s unstructured existence as it has become one of the most highly utilized reference points.
Bauwens (in Bruns, 2008) explores the incentive for Internet users to become involved in proactive input and contribution towards an open content area arguing that financial gain rarely justifies a reason for participation. The “increase in use value, their [the participant’s] own learning and reputation” (Bauwens in Bruns, 2008) are the most commonly cited reasons for providing input.
Wikipedia is fast becoming one of the most frequented sites in modern-day Internet usage. Wikipedia, as defined by Lih (2004) is “an Internet-based, user contributed encyclopedia that is collaboratively edited, and utilizes the wiki concept – the idea that any user on the Internet can change any page within the Web site, even anonymously”. Lih outlines the irony seen in Wikipedia’s unstructured existence as it has become one of the most highly utilized reference points.
Bauwens (in Bruns, 2008) explores the incentive for Internet users to become involved in proactive input and contribution towards an open content area arguing that financial gain rarely justifies a reason for participation. The “increase in use value, their [the participant’s] own learning and reputation” (Bauwens in Bruns, 2008) are the most commonly cited reasons for providing input.
Is Wikipedia worth it?
The topic of concern for academics is the reliability of the resource and the ability to ascertain unmodified, accurate material from the site with an average of 11.3 modifications made to each posted article (Lih, 2004). The open content wiki site, created by Jimmy Wales, saw the posting of over 210,000 English articles during a three year period – 2001 to 2004 (Lih, 2004) and now hosts more than 750,000 English posts (Winkler, 2005). Most interestingly, is the opposite approach differing faculties take on the acceptability of this resource.
The lack in accuracy of information and the ease of use for unqualified users begs the question, is Wikipedia a worthwhile source. Lih (2004) notes the websites counter-intuitive nature which is fueled by the technical lack of control when filtering quality information from uninformed opinion. In a world so reliant on digital learning, resources that make available ineffective and imprecise information, hinder the process of gaining readily accessible, accurate information. Winkler (2005) argues that Wikipedia is nothing more than an insulting attempt at replication a traditional scholarly reference with anonymous authors being granted the freedom to mock genuine referees and academic individuals.
Lih (2004) notes the admission of doubt from Wikipedia organizers of the vast array of uneven quality within documents. It is professions such as these that fuel the debate that Wikipedia be disregarded as a credible resource. The way in which Wikipedia is utilized in high school and tertiary education programs is highly controversial. Without the lack of academic reference point, it is not plausible that Wikipedia be accepted as a credible point of information. Undoubtedly Wikipedia hosts a range of the most useful and intelligent data digitally available: the problem rests in filtering from fact to the fiction.
Winkler (2004) argues that dismissing Wikipedia as an online reference point completely is not advised however in order for the site to gain credible recognition and an academic reputation, gateway control must be enforced in order to avoid malicious destruction of articles and ill-informed opinions circulating the site. If measures such as these were carried out, Wikipedia may have the potential to become an extremely reputable academic source.
References
Bruns, A. 2008. Open Source Software Development: Probabilistic Eyeballs in Bruns, Axel, Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life and Beyond: From Production to Produsage. Retrieved April 27, 2008 from Queensland University of Technology Course Materials Database https://cmd.qut.edu.au/cmd/KCB201/KCB201_BK_163481.pdf.
Google Images. 2008. http://images.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/rgn_wikipedia_wideweb__470x458,2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.theage.com.au/news/web/pms-staff-edited-wikipedia/2007/08/23/1187462443308.html&h=458&w=470&sz=62&hl=en&start=12&tbnid=VV_XiWk82fAzGM:&tbnh=126&tbnw=129&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dwikipedia%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den. Accessed April 27, 2008.
Lih, A. 2004. Wikipedia as Participatory Journalism: Reliable Sources?
Metrics for evaluating collaborative media as a news resource.
5th International Symposium on Online Journalism.
http://staff.washington.edu/clifford/teaching/readingfiles/utaustin-2004-wikipedia-rc2.pdf. Accessed April 27, 2008.
Winkler, C.A. 2005. Are Wikis worth the time? Collection of online information, such as Wikipedia, hold promise and peril for young researchers. http://myeport.com/published/t/uc/tucson73/collection/1/12/upload.pdf. Accessed April 27, 2008.
Underbelly - Gripping Drama!
Just a quick post to express how addicted I am to the new Australian series Underbelly! I find it fascinating that this type of drama was a huge part of real-life Australia for the best part of ten years. I am following the trial of Carl Williams closely and, after having bought the book, am trying to research the gangland war extensively. If anyone has any advice as to where to seek further information, please let me know.
For those interested, there are two interviews posted on my Blog page. The first includes both Judy Moran (Jason & Mark Moran's mother) and Barbara Williams (Carl Williams) mother. This interview had excellent potential however the low-grade journalist that was assigned to conduct the interview, really let the Australian public down. Ray Martin + Moran mothers interview = top ratings!
The second is an interview with Tracey Grimshaw and Roberta Williams (Carl William's wife). Her intelligence surprised me as she is not portrayed as a smart woman whatsoever. Her insight into the gangland war is quite intriguing.
Take a look.
For those interested, there are two interviews posted on my Blog page. The first includes both Judy Moran (Jason & Mark Moran's mother) and Barbara Williams (Carl Williams) mother. This interview had excellent potential however the low-grade journalist that was assigned to conduct the interview, really let the Australian public down. Ray Martin + Moran mothers interview = top ratings!
The second is an interview with Tracey Grimshaw and Roberta Williams (Carl William's wife). Her intelligence surprised me as she is not portrayed as a smart woman whatsoever. Her insight into the gangland war is quite intriguing.
Take a look.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Internet Addiction
The purpose of this blog post is to explore the nature of virtual relationships and examine whether their impact on modern society is positive, negative or indifferent. To commence this blog post, I have outlined a number of common benefits and disadvantages of online communities and the virtual world.
Benefits of online communities
· Ease of use ;
· Lack of barriers (geographical, financial and cultural);
· Ability to become a member of numerous communities simultaneously;
· Perceived idea of some type of benefit for the individual;
· Efficient communication;
· Speedy delivery of data;
· Exposure to relatively diminutive ideologies, forums and topics.
Disadvantages of online communities
· Addiction;
· Impact on real life relationships;
· Snowballing effect (when examining effects on racism);
· Loss of social skills.
The primary concern that will be discussed on this blog post is the issue of internet addiction. In order to conclude whether this issue is present, relevant and escalating, several resources have been utilized including a number of online gaming sites and resources from psychological referees.
The term “Internet addiction” was coined by psychologist Kimberley Young of the University of Pittsburgh in 1995 (O’Reilly, 2000). In 2000, Young opened the world first “virtual clinic”, The Centre for Online Addiction, which is aimed at curing internet addiction. Young (in O’Reilly, 2000) who claims to be the world’s first cyberpsychologist, argues “Internet addicts gradually spend less time with real people in their lives in exchange for solitary time in front of a computer”. This then leads to social withdrawal with can have alarming consequences.
Parsons (2005) estimates that on average between 4 – 10% of internet users become addicted to online communities, creating a wide spread epidemic. Parsons (2005) argues that the social component of online communities encourage participants to build and maintain virtual relationships, detracting from their ability to interact in real life social settings.
Ha, Kim, Bae and Bae, et. al (2007) argue that internet addiction found in adolescents is closely linked with depression, alcohol dependence and obsessive compulsive behaviours. Mackert (2007) supports this argument stating “addicts are more likely than habitual users to use the Internet for social purposes and to distract themselves from unpleasant thoughts in their daily lives”. This theory must be fueled by the violent nature of particular online games, for example, the extremely popular World of Warcraft. This online game allows individuals to form teams (known as guilds) to compete against other teams in order to kill their opponent. This game is infinite and therefore has no “end prize”. This is an excellent financial move by the creative team responsible for World of Warcraft due to the fact that a never ending game can continue to provide a high level of excitement and mystery… indefinitely.
Naturally, any business will be aiming to maximize profits, but at what cost? Creators of online gaming sites urgently need to review the content of their product and the ability it has to addict internet users. Every online gaming corporation should convey a sincere duty of care when creating products. Internet addiction can have devastating consequences and should be addressed as a serious and increasing contagion.
References
Google Images. 2008. http://images.google.com.au/images?hl=en&q=world+of+warcraft&gbv=2. Accessed April 24, 2008.
Benefits of online communities
· Ease of use ;
· Lack of barriers (geographical, financial and cultural);
· Ability to become a member of numerous communities simultaneously;
· Perceived idea of some type of benefit for the individual;
· Efficient communication;
· Speedy delivery of data;
· Exposure to relatively diminutive ideologies, forums and topics.
Disadvantages of online communities
· Addiction;
· Impact on real life relationships;
· Snowballing effect (when examining effects on racism);
· Loss of social skills.
The primary concern that will be discussed on this blog post is the issue of internet addiction. In order to conclude whether this issue is present, relevant and escalating, several resources have been utilized including a number of online gaming sites and resources from psychological referees.
The term “Internet addiction” was coined by psychologist Kimberley Young of the University of Pittsburgh in 1995 (O’Reilly, 2000). In 2000, Young opened the world first “virtual clinic”, The Centre for Online Addiction, which is aimed at curing internet addiction. Young (in O’Reilly, 2000) who claims to be the world’s first cyberpsychologist, argues “Internet addicts gradually spend less time with real people in their lives in exchange for solitary time in front of a computer”. This then leads to social withdrawal with can have alarming consequences.
Parsons (2005) estimates that on average between 4 – 10% of internet users become addicted to online communities, creating a wide spread epidemic. Parsons (2005) argues that the social component of online communities encourage participants to build and maintain virtual relationships, detracting from their ability to interact in real life social settings.
Ha, Kim, Bae and Bae, et. al (2007) argue that internet addiction found in adolescents is closely linked with depression, alcohol dependence and obsessive compulsive behaviours. Mackert (2007) supports this argument stating “addicts are more likely than habitual users to use the Internet for social purposes and to distract themselves from unpleasant thoughts in their daily lives”. This theory must be fueled by the violent nature of particular online games, for example, the extremely popular World of Warcraft. This online game allows individuals to form teams (known as guilds) to compete against other teams in order to kill their opponent. This game is infinite and therefore has no “end prize”. This is an excellent financial move by the creative team responsible for World of Warcraft due to the fact that a never ending game can continue to provide a high level of excitement and mystery… indefinitely.
Naturally, any business will be aiming to maximize profits, but at what cost? Creators of online gaming sites urgently need to review the content of their product and the ability it has to addict internet users. Every online gaming corporation should convey a sincere duty of care when creating products. Internet addiction can have devastating consequences and should be addressed as a serious and increasing contagion.
References
Google Images. 2008. http://images.google.com.au/images?hl=en&q=world+of+warcraft&gbv=2. Accessed April 24, 2008.
Ha, J.H., Kim, S.Y., Bae, S.C., Bae, S. et. al. 2007. Depression and Internet addiction in adolescents. Psychopathology, (40) 6. Retrieved April 28, 2008 from ProQuest Database.
Mackert, M, S. 2003. Internet habit and addiction. Michigan State University. Retrieved April 24, 2008 from ProQuest Database.
O’Reilly, M. 2000. Internet addicts can get online help. Canadian Medical Association Journal, (166) 2. Retrieved April 28, 2008 from ProQuest Database.
Parsons, J.M. 2005. An examination of massively multiplayer online role-playing games as a facilitator of Internet addiction. Iowa State University. Accessed April 24, 2008 from ProQuest Database.
Mackert, M, S. 2003. Internet habit and addiction. Michigan State University. Retrieved April 24, 2008 from ProQuest Database.
O’Reilly, M. 2000. Internet addicts can get online help. Canadian Medical Association Journal, (166) 2. Retrieved April 28, 2008 from ProQuest Database.
Parsons, J.M. 2005. An examination of massively multiplayer online role-playing games as a facilitator of Internet addiction. Iowa State University. Accessed April 24, 2008 from ProQuest Database.
Online Communities
Online communities defined
Broadly defined, online communities refer groups of individuals who form a community based on a common interest or theme; and choose to interact predominately via online means, i.e. the Internet, email and other forms of virtual communication.
Online communities explained
Online communities are continuing to dominate the communications industry in the 21st century. We, as media and communications consumers, rely thoroughly on the ease of use and quick transactions modern media has to offer. The revolution of Web 2.0 can be assigned partial credibility for this new phenomenon. Due to the fact that Web 2.0 creates a sphere where online interaction, creation and innovation are paramount, the need for real life, human interaction is rapidly diminishing. Flew (2004) discusses the importance of online communities arguing they allow consumers the chance to play, innovate and create.
The induction of Web 2.0 has seen the rising of several, no well-established, online ventures. MySpace, Facebook and Youtube are all online communities which thrive on the idea that virtual interaction is not only essential, fueling the debate that user-led content is soon set to dominate the communications industry. Flew (2004) outlines three primary differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 which can be attributed to the growing mass of online communities.
The number of users worldwide has increased significantly and the diversity of these users, geographically, culturally and socially, has escalated beyond expectation.
The nature of who uses the Internet, why they use it and how they use is has dramatically changed. An important factor in the new Internet revolution is the link to schooling systems making online interaction unavoidable in the education department. Another important feature is the ease of use of the Internet with facilities becoming available in Internet cafes, libraries and realistically, in the majority of homes throughout Australia.
The integration of online activities has become far less tangible over time and far more integrated into everyday activities. The use of the Internet, through email services and other online software, continues to dominate the business sector creating an efficient and corporate means of communication.
How do online communities organize themselves?
There are a number of features in online communities that make it unique and more enhanced than real life communities. Most notably is the fact that online communities are not restricted to geographical barriers. Individuals can be members of several online communities and the desire to join a community can be based on personal interest, professional interest or blatant curiosity. As can be seen in Dibben (2007), most people initially feel they will gain some benefit from being a member of an online community. This fuels the desire for individuals to participate in online activities and as a result builds the mass of online contributors playing a part in this online revolution.
Broadly defined, online communities refer groups of individuals who form a community based on a common interest or theme; and choose to interact predominately via online means, i.e. the Internet, email and other forms of virtual communication.
Online communities explained
Online communities are continuing to dominate the communications industry in the 21st century. We, as media and communications consumers, rely thoroughly on the ease of use and quick transactions modern media has to offer. The revolution of Web 2.0 can be assigned partial credibility for this new phenomenon. Due to the fact that Web 2.0 creates a sphere where online interaction, creation and innovation are paramount, the need for real life, human interaction is rapidly diminishing. Flew (2004) discusses the importance of online communities arguing they allow consumers the chance to play, innovate and create.
The induction of Web 2.0 has seen the rising of several, no well-established, online ventures. MySpace, Facebook and Youtube are all online communities which thrive on the idea that virtual interaction is not only essential, fueling the debate that user-led content is soon set to dominate the communications industry. Flew (2004) outlines three primary differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 which can be attributed to the growing mass of online communities.
The number of users worldwide has increased significantly and the diversity of these users, geographically, culturally and socially, has escalated beyond expectation.
The nature of who uses the Internet, why they use it and how they use is has dramatically changed. An important factor in the new Internet revolution is the link to schooling systems making online interaction unavoidable in the education department. Another important feature is the ease of use of the Internet with facilities becoming available in Internet cafes, libraries and realistically, in the majority of homes throughout Australia.
The integration of online activities has become far less tangible over time and far more integrated into everyday activities. The use of the Internet, through email services and other online software, continues to dominate the business sector creating an efficient and corporate means of communication.
How do online communities organize themselves?
There are a number of features in online communities that make it unique and more enhanced than real life communities. Most notably is the fact that online communities are not restricted to geographical barriers. Individuals can be members of several online communities and the desire to join a community can be based on personal interest, professional interest or blatant curiosity. As can be seen in Dibben (2007), most people initially feel they will gain some benefit from being a member of an online community. This fuels the desire for individuals to participate in online activities and as a result builds the mass of online contributors playing a part in this online revolution.
References
Google Images. 2008. http://images.google.com.au/images?q=facebook&gbv=2&hl=en. Accessed 22 April, 2008.
Flew, T. 2004. Virtual Cultures. New media: an introduction. Retrieved 22 April, 2008 from Queensland University of Technology Course Materials Database. https://qutvirtual.qut.edu.au/portal/pls/portal/olt_material_search_p?p_unit_code=KCB201
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
How is Web 2.0 diffferent to Web 1.0?
There are a number of minor differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 however for the purpose of this blog entry, one primary difference will comprise the main discussion point.
Web 1.0 refers to the initial version of the World Wide Web, prior to the introduction of the Web 2.0 craze. Web 1.0 was used as a form of one-way distribution of media content throughout the period 1994 - 2004 and saw consumers astonished at the vast amount of information to which they had become exposed to. Flew (2004) notes the relatively passive role the Internet held pre-Web 2.0 arguing that access to computer literature was relatively limited and communication was largely text based.
Web 2.0 on the other hand, allows consumers to take an active role in their media usage and acts as a platform for creativity, innovation and collaboration. Online social networking sites, for example MySpace, FaceBook and Skype, are all products of the Web 2.0 revolution. Iskold (2007) references a social networking site which has a primary focus on networking with your own neighbours. It is spheres such as these that confirm the argument that Web 2.0 is a community prone, social networking initiative.
One of the most important differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0, is the ability to transfer responses to the posted information. This feature allows passive consumers to become active users and take on a full time produsage position whereby the user not only accepts, but also creates and modifies existing content.
Web 1.0 refers to the initial version of the World Wide Web, prior to the introduction of the Web 2.0 craze. Web 1.0 was used as a form of one-way distribution of media content throughout the period 1994 - 2004 and saw consumers astonished at the vast amount of information to which they had become exposed to. Flew (2004) notes the relatively passive role the Internet held pre-Web 2.0 arguing that access to computer literature was relatively limited and communication was largely text based.
Web 2.0 on the other hand, allows consumers to take an active role in their media usage and acts as a platform for creativity, innovation and collaboration. Online social networking sites, for example MySpace, FaceBook and Skype, are all products of the Web 2.0 revolution. Iskold (2007) references a social networking site which has a primary focus on networking with your own neighbours. It is spheres such as these that confirm the argument that Web 2.0 is a community prone, social networking initiative.
One of the most important differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0, is the ability to transfer responses to the posted information. This feature allows passive consumers to become active users and take on a full time produsage position whereby the user not only accepts, but also creates and modifies existing content.
Does modern media encourage racism?
Is modern media a main player in the endless battle against racism? Recent events including the Cronulla riots and the controversial debate over indigenous rights, have all been fueled by slurs passed on via common media channels. By way of SMS and email, large audiences are firstly informed and angered, then notified of planned violence. Police and Armed Forces have little control over readily accessible media content and therefore have minimal impact on preventing the eruptions. Past experiences have demonstrated that by the time Police are made aware of the intentions, an audience, too large for Armed Forces to handle, has already formed. It poses the question; without the aide of modern technology, would these events (and others likely to take place in the future) have reached such an escalated point of destruction?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
