considers the wider implications that Wikipedia holds for public diplomacy 2.0. The article’s findings highlight Wikipedia as a unique venue that promotes multidirectional and layered conversations and folksonomy as public diplomacy, while also identifying key challenges to public diplomacy’s structured and
.0, folksonomy, wikinomics, cyber mythology.
The freedom of culture is the main purpose consolidating the
communities of net activists. In the 90s the idea was related to the cyberpunk
movement, based on the cultural trend of being technically skilled at using
new technologies, seen as rather
The article concerns the problem of boundaries of cyber-freedom and cyber-democracy. User-generated content portals, wikiprojects and virtual worlds depend on the will of users to re-define the meanings and - on limitations of economy of the Web 2.0. Social-networking may be then regarded as the embodiment of cyber-utopia of peaceful cooperation of humankind but social creation and transmission of knowledge is invisibly shaped by new economy - wikinomics and telecoms. Authors analyse the most important ideas of cyber-communities as free culture, wiki and open source. They explicit the fundamental elements of wiki-identity and of folksonomic order of knowledge. The Web 2.0 is not only the marketing trend controlling societies but also the tool of social pressure of bottom-to-top character. The openness for user demands stemming from economic reasons changes the authorities and companies as well. The change is culturally significant as it creates the new order of society and new discourse of knowledge and power. However, there appear new threats as privacy loss or control and electronic vandalism. The chapter shows new areas of anthropological research as cyber-ritual analysis and research on online communities and their cyber mythologies.
objects because they realise content’s re-
semantisation. It enables a diversified memory based on the form of
hypertext. Web 2.0 leads to the birth of folksonomies, ways of managing
information based on tagging that every user makes, different from
taxonomy. Web 2.0 is directed towards the creation of
Digital memory is an artificial type of memory that contains data and instructions. In the era of web 2.0, we are facing an evolution of such memory that involves a great dynamicity. In fact the well-known process of usability, sharing contents and creating categories affect continuously the web users’ memory. We suggest that this new kind of digital memory can be regarded as ‘fluid memory.’ As we know, the web 2.0 enhances the process of memory externalisation and dissemination. Users are not involved in univocal using of those objects because they realise content’s resemantisation. It enables a diversified memory based on the form of hypertext. Web 2.0 leads to the birth of folksonomies, ways of managing information based on tagging that every user makes, different from taxonomy. Web 2.0 is directed towards the creation of hybrid systems where human specific skills have benefit and enhancement thanks to the close interaction with the computational abilities of the computer. So the creation of memory in the cybercultural age is a human activity realised in interaction with digital machines inside an epistemological context that gives a new shape to the representation of knowledge.
Strukturierung handelt: Folksonomy is the result of personal free tagging of information and objects (anything with a URL) for one’s own retrieval. The tagging is done in a social environment (usually shared and open to others). Folksonomy is created from the act of tagging by the person consuming the
storage which is limitless and ‘free,’
requiring little technical mastery to publish and share. With the ability to
organise content through user-generated tagging systems such as
folksonomies, the democratic promise of social media appears to extend the
web’s potential to overcome hierarchies of
objects”, including: (1)
collaborative annotation, (2) user-derived content, (3) folksonomy
tagging, (4) community bibliography, and (5) shared text analysis
(2012, 451). Although collaborative annotation and folksonomy tag-
ging most directly contribute to the editing process, each of these
report of Activity 5 of a study commissioned by the EC (EUROSTAT &
DGENV) in the framework of the INSPIRE initiative, Spatial Applications Division
Leuven (SADL), K.U.Leuven. 32 p.
VanderWal, T. 2005. Folksonomy definition. vanderwal.net. http://www.vanderwal.net/
set of categories, or a
different type of categorisation – then what schools do must also change
A related change is in popularly-created, tagged, web-based categories –
folksonomies – which users clearly find a valuable addition (or alternative) to
traditional taxonomies. If it