Blogs or wikis is the question. While both are interactive and incorporate "community," amongst users, blogs stem from a more centralized place of creation whereas a wiki is more decentralized. This suggests that Wikis are more susceptible to "wrong information" due to its decentralized nature that allows anyone, educated, experienced or not to have a say in a specified topic. A blog comes from an author who has somewhat a more reliable amount of information on a given topic.
The reality is that both are crucial in today's modern-day and age. Wikis are more appropriate in some instances while blogs are advisable over wikis in other circumstances. For example, for a politician running a campaign, a wiki that allows voters to say and voice their opinion can be pretty helpful to tap into helping with the "grassroots" mobilization (as mentioned in the article about grassroots mobilization).
The sample politician may prefer a blog in setting the tone for party platform that communicates values, ideals and policies they wish to communicate with their voters.
Neither is good or bad but each is better in different instances in today's interconnected world.
It's worthy to note that blogging can be used for collaboration in handful of ways. Bloggers can blog list other bloggers' work. This allows and enables bloggers to tag along others' work which essentially gives all parties exposure.
From the standpoint of collaborating & decentralizing, wikis may have a new added use when it comes to giving users input capabilities to religion. This will allow followers of different religions dynamically change certain religious concepts for suitable modification to keep up with the modern times. And of course this will be very controversial.
The reality is that both are crucial in today's modern-day and age. Wikis are more appropriate in some instances while blogs are advisable over wikis in other circumstances. For example, for a politician running a campaign, a wiki that allows voters to say and voice their opinion can be pretty helpful to tap into helping with the "grassroots" mobilization (as mentioned in the article about grassroots mobilization).
The sample politician may prefer a blog in setting the tone for party platform that communicates values, ideals and policies they wish to communicate with their voters.
Neither is good or bad but each is better in different instances in today's interconnected world.
It's worthy to note that blogging can be used for collaboration in handful of ways. Bloggers can blog list other bloggers' work. This allows and enables bloggers to tag along others' work which essentially gives all parties exposure.
From the standpoint of collaborating & decentralizing, wikis may have a new added use when it comes to giving users input capabilities to religion. This will allow followers of different religions dynamically change certain religious concepts for suitable modification to keep up with the modern times. And of course this will be very controversial.
I agree that Wiki's can sometimes seem unreliable due to the fact that more that many people can add to it without needing qualifications.
ReplyDeleteIzabel,
DeleteAnd that is arguably its most dangerous functionality. The democratization is surely its best part but that opens it up to a major deficiency and inaccuracy as well. So it's a double-edged sword.