[Publib] 2.0: It cheapens us, it cheapens everyone

[David King]

"I've opted to be vocal about the weaknesses I see in Wikipedia and similar
online efforts, and to NOT participate"

Instead of being vocal about weaknesses and NOT participating, how about
simply improving the source? We're librarians - we know our facts, and can
verify them. Why aren't more librarians correcting and even IMPROVING the
quality of, say, Wikipedia entries (if that's really a problem)?

Don't sit back, complain, and not offer to change anything - that's
worthless noise. Instead, go change it yourself - which is what 2.0 enables.


-- 
David King
davidleeking.com - blog
http://davidleeking.com/etc - videoblog

On Jan 31, 2008 2:37 PM, Michael <drweb at san.rr.com> wrote:

> My personal take is.. I've opted to be vocal about the weaknesses I see in
> Wikipedia and similar online efforts, and to NOT participate. I wouldn't
> have said "cheapens," personally, but I know what Joe is getting at. Chasing
> the latest technological whizbang without applying our own professional
> standards for authority, credibility, quality, and so on to it is not
> helping our profession, or our patrons who rely on us. So, in that sense,
> the bandwagon effect applies. We are probably all somewhat "guilty" of
> 2.0-ism, but like many savvy souls on the Internet, it's a good time
> before the logs are all burned to step back and say, what are we doing here?
>
> My $.02 won't even coffee..
>
> For Friday, will Joe write something about Super Bowl mania in Phoenix? :)
>
> Best,
> DrWeb aka Michael
> drweb at san.rr.com
>
>
> On Jan 31, 2008 10:55 AM, K.G. Schneider <kgs at bluehighways.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 12:46:57 -0500, "Kathleen Stipek" <kstipek at aclib.us>
> > said:
> > > While I think that there can be some use for wikis and similar
> > > technological resources both for librarians and the general public, I
> > > have some of Joe's reservations about accuracy and authority in
> > > information resources.  Right now, we can't tell who is contributing
> > to
> > > Wikipedia or any other wiki.  There may be a way to chase down the
> > > information on somebody's screen name to find out if this person knows
> > > what he's talking about, but the ordinary patron hasn't got time for
> > it.
> >
> > This is a valid problem but is not adequate for supporting the broader
> > argument that 2.0 "cheapens" us.
> >
> > A number of people (including me) have written at length about
> > Wikipedia's problems. As Kathleen says, we need to participate. We have
> > not been loud enough in this conversation. For a really good discussion
> > about the role of expertise, see Liz Lawley's talk to Google:
> >
> > http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ctyi98ruvzY
> >
> > Karen G. Schneider
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Publib mailing list
> Publib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/mailman/listinfo/publib
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.webjunction.org/wjlists/publib/attachments/20080131/99daf753/attachment.htm