Blog vs. Wiki

All over the internet, we see things such as blogs and wikis. We can compare and contrast the differences, since there definitely are a few. Before doing so, let's give a definition of each. A Wiki is "a website that allows collaborative editing of its content and structure by its users." A Blog is "a regularly updated website or web page, typically one run by an individual or small group, that is written in an informal or conversational style." Blogs are created and maintained by individual authors, which may or may not express the opinion(s) of others and/or the general public. Wikis, in comparison; are created for group use, and in effect it can have its contents updated and revised continually by members of said group. Wikipedia is a prime example of this, groups of people that research various topics and fields of study work together to create/update/publish new age encyclopedia articles. Since it is a group effort, updates are constant in order to minimize informational errors. Since blogs are more of an individual effort, the collective error-checking and maintenance isn't present; though an authors personal touch may be more attainable and visible to readers. As said by Kathy Gill in the adoloscent years of blogs: "By 1998, there were a handful of sites that we would identify today as blogs. In 1999, the Poynter Institute hired Jim Romenesko to produce the “MediaNews” blog; by 2002, analysts estimated the universe at 500,000 blogs." How can bloggers collaborate, being that this line of publishing is a more individualistic one? If bloggers talking about a related field actually read the array of information that is available from other bloggers, different perspectives may arise leading to, or rather be a consequence from collective brain-storming. This can be a good or a bad thing, depending on the circumstances and topic(s) at hand. The collective effort can lead to multiple sources and voices being led to being heard, not putting any one person or group to the forefront. This leads to different answers and a range of opinions from various respected sources, unlike a Wiki. When dealing with these, opinions/facts can be disqualified/squeezed out for more respectable information, since information is available to be changed by members of said group(s). This creates more of an environment of checks and balances, that is necessary since Wikis normally are based on factual information, meanwhile Blogs may or may not contain factual information, as well as biased opionions and whathave you. As stated by Margaret Locher on an article from 2008: "Early adopters say corporate wikis work best when they're focused narrowly on a specific project or collection of information, as well as on a specific group of users. The heated debate within the Wikipedia community over its editorial policies suggests that, at the very least, having lots and lots of contributors begets conflicts over wiki management, i.e. 'Wikis are very good for a departmental project'." In what other ways can Wikis be used that isn't common in this new digital age? People that have concerns about what they eat, for example; can benefit from a Food Wiki. A collaborative effort by experts and people in the field about what is and isn't healthy, as well as respectable sources always keeping an eye out for invasive posts, which in turn would lead to constant updating as well as moderating. The Wiki model would work great for independent news organizations as well, without the mainstream media middleman. In this way, reporters (vouched for by media organizations) can post/correct/update news constantly; sticking to the Reporters code of ethics at all times. 

Citations:

"How Can We Measure the Influence of the Blogosphere?" by Kathy E. Gill. Workshop on the Weblogging Ecosystem, May 2004 Available at: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxiYXJ1Y2huZXdtZWRpYXxneDozZTliYzM1NjU0ZWQ1NjVi

"Wiki While You Work; The technology popularized by Wikipedia can help companies gather and manage their own collective knowledge" by Margaret Locher. CIO, May 1, 2008. Vol. 21, Iss. 14. Available at: http://www.cio.com/article/336818/More_on_How_to_Build_Your_Own_Wikipedia 

Social Media: An Introverts Dream

2/14/2017- We all enjoy taking a look at Facebook, or enjoying posts on Reddit from time to time. Chances are, some of the digital connections we have with various people online, are real relationships from real life that have just been modernized, or so to speak. For other people, going online may be the sole outlet they have; not just an extra medium to interact with the rest of the world. I believe that social media doesn't necessarily promote introvertism; but that it does encourage it. Some browse, look at and perhaps take part in other peoples posts and messages, however these social interactions don't really happen outside of the internet. This outlet feeds their interactive needs, thus nurturing this seemingly "social" behavior. Attempt at social behavior, yes; but I believe that in these cases, social media encourages anti-socialism when used as the main connection to the outside world. I'm going to study social media in this context, taking into account how things would have been for introverts when forced into the world in the pre-digital age, versus the false (up to a degree) sense of social interactivity via the internet in the digital age.