SOCIOLOGY AND, OF AND IN

Web 2.0:

SOME INITIAL CONSIDERATIONSBY DAVID BEER AND ROGER BURROWS, 2007

Summary and Presentation by F i l i z EfeMaster of Communication in Digital Media, U N I V E R S I T Y O F W A S H I N G T O N

2 0 0 9

ABOUT

In their research (2007)

“Sociology and, of and in Web 2.0: Some Initial Considerations”,

David Beer and Roger Burrows

introduce the Web 2.0 by providing definitions and examples of the wikis, folksonomies, mashups and social networking sites

and point towards agendas for the development of a viable sociology of Web 2.0.

MAIN SECTIONSThe paper is divided into three sections:

•Descriptions and examples of Web 2.0

sociology and Web 2.0:

•Elaboration of how we might begin to think sociologically about these Web 2.0 applications

sociology of Web 2.0:

•Discussion of various ways to engage sociologically with these new web applications

sociology in Web 2.0:

SOCIOLOGY AND WEB 2.0

Web 2.0: They are second generation platforms where users are involved as

producers and consumers of the information. (O'Reilly, 2005) Both operating software and applications move above the level of

a single device. (O'Reilly, 2005). Technology moves from the desktop to the webtop. (Lash, 2006)

Users are involved in processes of production and consumption as they generate and browse online content, as they tag and blog, post and share.

SOCIOLOGY AND WEB 2.0

SOCIOLOGY AND WEB 2.0They focus on four types of Web 2.0 application:

Wikis: User-generated resources constructed and edited by anyone who wishes to contribute by adding and/or modifying the information. Ex. Wikipedia, OneLook

Folksonomies: Social online platforms where users label (tagging), locate, mark or classify a webpage. (content describing/classifying content and enabling it searchable). Ex. YouTube, Del.icio.us.com and Flickr

Mashups: Hybrid applications, where two or more technologies or services are conflated into a completely new, novel, service' (Maness, 2006: 9). They present and repurpose existing information in new ways. Ex. Gizoogle

Social Networking Sites (SNS): Online platforms where users build profiles about themselves, posting photos, information about their backgrounds, views, work, and so on, and make 'friends' with other users.

SOCIOLOGY OF WEB 2.0 They point towards three agendas for the development of a

viable sociology of Web 2.0:

the changing relations between the production and consumption of internet content;

the mainstreaming of private information posted to the public domain;

and, the emergence of a new rhetoric of 'democratisation'.

THE CHANGING RELATIONS BETWEEN THE PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION OF CONTENT

The line between the creation and consumption of content in these environments was blurred' (Maness, 2006).

Users are taking active role in producing commodities. (Thrift, 2005) The feed they generate about their everyday lives; the content posted on profiles and connections are the commodities of Web 2.0. This content is the informational archive of the individuals’ everyday lives.

THE MAINSTREAMING OF PRIVATE INFORMATION POSTED TO THE PUBLIC DOMAIN

Especially SNS creates a situation in which private information (Thoughts, views, education/employment information, personal photographs) becomes open and accessible to anyone with access to the Internet.

As users participate in generating or producing content they build up an archive of their 'everyday life' that is openly accessible. Their preferences, choices, and other personal details.

A NEW RHETORIC OF 'DEMOCRATISATION' Web 2.0 has been ushered in by rhetoric of 'democratization'.

This is defined by stories and images of 'the people' reclaiming the Internet and taking control of its content; a kind of 'people's internet' or less positively, the emergence of the cult of the amataur (Keen, 2007).

This has led to a new collaborative, participatory or open culture, where anyone can get involved, and everyone has the potential to be seen or heard.

According to this vision there are opportunities for our thoughts to get heard, our videos to be seen, and our music to be listened to.

This rhetoric demands sociological examination: how it is formed; the formation of new hierarchies, patterns of social participation.

SOCIOLOGY IN WEB 2.0 “we need to be inside of the networks, online communities, and

collaborative movements to be able to see what is going on and describe it. “

“once inside these networks we may explore the possibilities of using Web 2.0 applications, and particularly the interactive potentials of SNS, as research tools or research technologies.”

“Web 2.0 has a range of implications for sociologists. Not only does it create for us new opportunities for research, and maybe teaching, but these applications are already being used to say things about us, about the concepts and writers that we use, about our teaching, and about our institutions. Whatever we may choose to call it, it is important that we at least acknowledge that we are being subject to processes of remediation, and to begin to think through how we might respond.”

REFERENCE

Beer, D and Burrows, R (2007). “Sociology and, of and in Web 2.0: Some Initial Considerations”. Sociological Research Online, Volume 12, Issue 5. Retrieved on July 19, 2009 from http://www.socresonline.org.uk/12/5/17.html