Community or Idiocracy?

Sitting down to read for forty minutes was quite a freeing experience. I noticed yesterday that my extensive use of the internet has honed my speed reading and information-skimming skills; which, is beneficial in some cases, but it has not helped my skills for comprehensive reading. I imagined this reading would take me far more than forty minutes, but it was quite an interesting read, so it didn't take as long as expected . And although I immersed myself in this publication, I probably got out of it as much as I would have if i had just skimmed over the writing. The deep reading was relaxing, and pretty enlightening, but it was not what I expected to get out of it. I guess you can only soak in so much.

The article itself was quite interesting. I gathered that his point came to the face that Web 2.0 was a collaborative effort, of everyone who participated (quite like the FOO Camp). But Keen makes the argument that the collaborators are uninformed non-intellects. He is worried about the loss of legitimate and informed opinions being replaced with shallow misrepresentations of the truth. I believe that these people exist, the absent-minded, "I-only-have-an-opinion-because-I-can-post-it-on-my-blog", uneducated and inexperienced collaborators. In fact, they not only exist, but Keen is right in the sense that they run rampant through the digiscape of the interwebs. I believe it is up to the consumer to make educated, objective decisions of whose opinion to consider seriously and whose to throw away.

I actually like the collaborative effort that is Web 2.0. yeah some people are idiots and write about what they don't know, but other people provide insight and interesting ideas that we wouldn't otherwise have without this convenient collaboration. I guess just use discretion as to whose thoughts you may think about, and whose you write off.