I think Google as well as Wikipedia are both interesting examples of managing the issue of quality in a good way, because they employ peer-production and self-regulation to run their platforms online. I think these two creative functions make the obvious distinction between social media and mass media. Generally speaking, mass media is the final result of a group of people working together and usually it has commercial purpose; Currently, Social media more and more becomes the efforts of thousands of individuals despite the geographic differences which consummate the object through interacted modification and completeness.
When analyzing the success of Google, we have to admite that the crucial innovation of Google is its Pagerank, which introduces peer-based judgments of relevance and allow the users to access the most related websites through text typing. Unlike other search engine, Google is improved by many other interactive applications which have practical usage in real life. Being a frequent user, I like Google maps best. It not only shows the detail map and how long it takes by car between A and B but also including many photos which created by other users. In this way, the stark map immediately becomes vivid and attractive to those want to travel there. I think Google provides various of platforms to gather the power of individuals in order to service individuals rather than aiming at mass audiences. Besides Google maps and Youtube, Google also provide some platforms who may have commercial usage for users and that’s Google Ads and words. It allows users to earn money from relevant ads on their websites based on per click.
When analyzing the success of Wikipedia, we’d better take a look at its peer production. Like the Open Directory Project talking in Benkler’s book, the volunteers who create the content as well as modify it are not affiliated with Wikipedia and receive no compensation. I remember I ever read a related material which is about the survey on why people contribute on social media, such as Wikipedia, and the answer is simple, because they are interested. The self-motivated action feels good because they can share what they know and learn from others. Everyone accesses to the information at the same level and the web enables the same authority to edit the content.
From my perspective, social media is the updating version of mass media but during the process of producing and modifying the content, more individuals tend to participate!
3 comments:
Emerging technologies in new globalized moments have subsequently called into question of shaping and presenting information in transparent way on grassroots’ level. Different media folks have dealt with this problem with a variety of ways and perspectives like meta-moderation, Karma etc. The most aware and conscious public of human history is shifting in numerous ways on its social note. On the critical issue of how people acquire and perceive news and contemporary information on social media, we still haven’t any sound proves to judge the real essence of problem.
New generation is adopting more interactive and near-to-hand outlets in order to get information. Consequently, desire for digging up quality news on both traditional and modern social media has aroused. Traditional media has time-honored already a great sense of transparent and quality media channel during last many decades. On the other side, social media channels are still struggling with the issue because of the vary reason of anonymity and information tracking incapability of these so-called social media.
A large number of users have begun to look for news sources that assure the source of information being propagated to them either by integrity of media outlet or interactivity. This trend, in particular, confronts nothing less but the basic structure and methodology of news and information gathering and broadcasting. These technological and attitudinal swings have shaped the social media backdrop intensely complex, particularly for the folks behind these media. Intellectuals and knowledgeable spectators have long noted that swift, consistent shift of consumer’s conceptions of that news are vital to the continued existence of a free and self-governing society. Incapability of the current social media to address and brace associations with users/audiences and their emerging needs could result a destructive upshot on the future of social media technologies.
For a scientific and logical solution of any said problem, I can’t trust on the information posted by an anonymous user whose credibility can be challenged at any forum. On the other side, at given time X, not any researcher can rely on the information posted by any user till it is not verified or ‘’re-verified’’ by any meta-moderation or semantic web systems. Even after a solid verification by present tools used by social websites, most of the times, user can’t be assured about the real source of information. Hence this information can’t be referred at any logical forum.
As a result, we come to the burning question—what kind of new models can be adapted to deal with these above mentioned challenges? I hope to find some serious suggestions during the seminar discussion.
I agree with the opinions of Zhang Xiaofan about the differences between the mass media and social media. The success and advantage of social media is the interactiveness between the content producers and consumers comparing with traditional media. The development of social media emphasizes the power of individuals. Everyone can be the peer producer with the help of social media. They do not need to be experts or authority in the special field, and they become the producers when they express their personal opinions. Mass media always produces the content created by some editors and published to viewers after the editors’ discussion. The basic rule of mass media is that the content is produced by several authoritative persons and the power of viewers is much weaker than producers. But social media is different, and it gives the viewers more rights to produce the corresponding content. It can build the bridge between the producers and viewers. Traditional viewers can also be the producers of social media. Because of increasing the diversity of media, the quality of media is also various and it needs more complicated filters to sift the content which is produced by normal people, but not by experts. I also agree that “social media is the updating version of mass media”, and it provides equal opportunity for everyone.
Lusha Wang
Post a Comment