linking back to brembs.net






My lab:
lab.png
Next up at "The public, the media and politics: intellectual debate and science in the age of digital communication" was a talk about collaborative works of text. The start was no surprise: Wikipedia. Daniela Pscheider used the example of Wikipedia to elaborate on her five theses:
  1. The digital opus is free from materiality. It is endless in space and characterized by a pluralistic logic.
  2. The digital opus exists only in the moment and for the moment. It is unstable in time and episodic in nature. The digital opus is not a product, it is the process.
  3. The relation between author and digital opus is ambiguous. The digital opus lost its author as authorship diffuses among the collaborating contributors.
  4. The digital opus ceases to show a communicative direction. The triade of author-opus-reader is breaking up structurally.
  5. The digital opus lacks authority. It has problems competing with classic (printed) works.
Thesis three and four, interestingly, but maybe not surprisingly, raised the attribution problem for collaborative authors in the sciences. This was picked up and re-emphasized again at the final closing remarks of Daniela Pscheida. However, she only raised the issues without providing any solutions.

What was surprising,though, was that the 90-9-1 rule was not mentioned when the general lack of participation in collaborative writing was discussed.

I don't know what she was trying to say with thesis 5 and her explanations also didn't help clarifying it.
Posted on Tuesday 15 February 2011 - 10:22:44 comment: 0
{TAGS}


You must be logged in to make comments on this site - please log in, or if you are not registered click here to signup
Render time: 0.0580 sec, 0.0061 of that for queries.