QUALITY VS. QUANTITY
In the physical world, academic books, journals and other resources have undergone strict evaluations by scholars, publishers and librarians. Information and knowledge is voluntarily owned by the authors or companies that generate it. However, in an online environment there are no filters. Anyone can access information.
Contemporary communities, both physical and virtual, have now more access then ever before to a wealth of information and knowledge. Shared networks are created by contemporary virtual cultures using new media technologies to engage participation and collaboration. These networks revolve around relationships of trust and yet a proportion of active contributors remain anonymous.
Users and consumers are now more increasingly encouraged to engage with information and reproduce content drawing upon previous experiences. This content is of relevance to the individual or interest group and often reflects local and hyperlocal issues/interests within the community. However, with so much information to access, to what extend are local or hyperlocal users able to interpret and evaluate this information. Will they have the appropriate knowledge, tools or experience allowing them to decipher information and determine what information is credible and relevant.
Metcalfe's law (http://www-ec.njit.edu/~robertso/infosci/metcalf.html [accessed May 8, 2008]) claims that the value of a telecommunications network grows proportional to the number of its users—the more people generating content, the better that content is. However, where do we draw the line between Quality and Quantity?
“Excellent resources reside alongside the most dubious” (Kirk 1996). Individuls within virtual communities choose their level of participation as well as their level of accountability. Will the anonymous contributor be held responsible for the information they have generated? It’s these anonymous contributors that are dubious and cloud the credibility of a participatory culture. Society still needs to develop appropriate policies to overcome these issues to accurately determine quality of content.
Metcalfe's law (http://www-ec.njit.edu/~robertso/infosci/metcalf.html [accessed May 8, 2008]) claims that the value of a telecommunications network grows proportional to the number of its users—the more people generating content, the better that content is. However, where do we draw the line between Quality and Quantity?
“Excellent resources reside alongside the most dubious” (Kirk 1996). Individuls within virtual communities choose their level of participation as well as their level of accountability. Will the anonymous contributor be held responsible for the information they have generated? It’s these anonymous contributors that are dubious and cloud the credibility of a participatory culture. Society still needs to develop appropriate policies to overcome these issues to accurately determine quality of content.
References
Kirk, E. 2002. Evaluating Information found on the Internet. http://www. creativeclusters.com/modules/wfsection/ article. php?articleid=18&page=0. (accessed April 8 2008).
Metcalfe, R. 2008. http://www-ec.njit.edu/~robertso/infosci/metcalf.html (accessed May 8, 2008)
2 comments:
The other day a friend of mine, a high school teacher, told me that she would reprimand her students for giving her assignments with web resources as primary sources. Her reason was that web resources could not be verified as legitimate information like a book or journal could be.
I would argue that we already have the tools to determine what information is credible and relevant. Perhaps, because I am of a generation that is very comfortable with the internet and utilising web resources, I find it easy to find credible internet resources. To put it simply I would say that you just apply the same rules that you would apply to print resources. That is, if information is not referenced and cannot be verified, like information in a publication such as New Idea, then it's not likely that you should rely on it. Conversely, if the information can be verified and comes from reputable sources, such university publishers and peer-reviewed articles, it is likely that the information can be relied upon.
This is an interesting topic and a good post. However i think you have made a wrong assumption here. I don't believe that in the case of Metcalfe's law there is a line between quality and quantity when talking about virtual cultures. Take wikipedia for example, there are tens of millions of users who all work together to create the valuable resource that wikipedia is. Now do you believe that if there were less users contributing wikipedia would be a more or less reliable source?
Personally i don't think that the line between quality and quantity exists when talking in this sense, i feel the more people who have input the better the resource will be.
Post a Comment