Collectivism vs. individualism in a wiki world: librarians respond to Jaron Lanier's essay 'Digital Maoism: the hazards of the new online collectivism'

From WikiLit
Jump to: navigation, search
Publication (help)
Collectivism vs. individualism in a wiki world: librarians respond to Jaron Lanier's essay 'Digital Maoism: the hazards of the new online collectivism'
Authors: Markel Tumlin, Steven R. Harris, Heidi Buchanan, Krista Schmidt, Kay Johnson [edit item]
Citation: Serials Review 33 (1): 45-53. 2007 March.
Publication type: Journal article
Peer-reviewed: Yes
Database(s):
DOI: 10.1016/j.serrev.2006.11.002.
Google Scholar cites: Citations
Link(s): Paper link
Added by Wikilit team: Added on initial load
Search
Article: Google Scholar BASE PubMed
Other scholarly wikis: AcaWiki Brede Wiki WikiPapers
Web search: Bing Google Yahoo!Google PDF
Other:
Services
Format: BibTeX
Collectivism vs. individualism in a wiki world: librarians respond to Jaron Lanier's essay 'Digital Maoism: the hazards of the new online collectivism' is a publication by Markel Tumlin, Steven R. Harris, Heidi Buchanan, Krista Schmidt, Kay Johnson.


[edit] Abstract

Jaron Lanier's essay {Digital} Maoism: The Hazards of the New Online Collectivism" is a self-described rant of the dangers of the hive mentality in suppressing individual human intelligence as demonstrated in online resources such as Wikipedia and {MySpace.} He sees merit in collective decision-making and problem-solving if evaluation is uncontroversial but argues that individuals are essential in providing judgment taste and user experiences in many situations. Lanier's essay appeared in the online progressive publication Edge and received responses from a variety of technologists academics and writers. In this {"Balance} Point" column four academic librarians provide a library public services viewpoint in responding to Lanier's essay."

[edit] Research questions

"Jaron Lanier’s essay bDigital Maoism: The Hazards of the New Online CollectivismQ is a self-described rant of the dangers of the hive mentality in suppressing individual human intelligence as demonstrated in online resources such as Wikipedia and MySpace. He sees merit in collective decision-making and problem-solving if evaluation is uncontroversial, but argues that individuals are essential in providing judgment, taste, and user experiences in many situations. Lanier’s essay appeared in the online progressive publication Edge and received responses from a variety of technologists, academics, and writers. In this bBalance PointQ column, four academic librarians provide a library public services viewpoint in responding to Lanier’s essay."

Research details

Topics: Other collaboration topics [edit item]
Domains: Library science [edit item]
Theory type: Analysis [edit item]
Wikipedia coverage: Case [edit item]
Theories: "Undetermined" [edit item]
Research design: Case study [edit item]
Data source: N/A [edit item]
Collected data time dimension: N/A [edit item]
Unit of analysis: N/A [edit item]
Wikipedia data extraction: N/A [edit item]
Wikipedia page type: N/A [edit item]
Wikipedia language: N/A [edit item]

[edit] Conclusion

"In all fairness, Wikipedia is not the only thing that we urge our patrons to use carefully. Because writing, creating, aggregating and disseminating information have all become easier with the advent of the Internet, the Internet has empowered anyone who is interested in information. Students are convinced that resources like Google and Wikipedia have what they need. Perhaps because students perceive these as being easier and being a more understandable way of searching for information, or perhaps it is just laziness.

Collectivism has added a revolutionary dimension to the world of online information. It is both exciting and daunting; so many more people can contribute ideas or review information for accuracy, yet we now live in a world where encyclopedias have risk disclaimers. We do not know how long collective action will continue to drive information collaboration online or how Wikipedia will continue to evolve or even exist. We do know that as everyone deals with the information deluge, librarians will still be a valuable resource for helping patrons evaluate the accuracy and integrity of information sources."

[edit] Comments


Further notes[edit]