In defence of the Web 2.0 Democracy
Monday, February 25th, 2008I was interested to read a blog entry by Chris Wilson on Slate entitled ‘The Wisdom of the Chaperones – Digg, Wikipedia, and the myth of Web 2.0 democracy.’.
The entry looks at how sites like Wikipedia and Digg, which purport to be web democracies actually work more like an oligarchy, where a small segment of users are responsible for the majority of content and the sites general direction.
Where I find problems with Wilson’s view starts in his title. It is clear that there may be an argument to show that sites such as Digg and Wikipedia are in the control of a select bunch of users. However, these users have not been selected, appointed or employed but have risen through the ranks (so to speak) through active participation, knowledge and the support of other users.
