The many advancements and improvements associated with using the internet, particularly the ability to publish ideas and images, has been put in the hands of nearly everyone.  The advent of websites like Wikipedia, Facebook, Youtube, and user friendly Blog websites has all sorts of implications, both positive and negative, for disseminating information, ideas, and points of view.

For example, newspapers have experienced a sharp decline in circulation and economic viability, in recent years, largely due to free, instant, and easily available online content posted on websites and blogs. Many people believe this is a welcome change as it allows so many more people to become involved in deciding what issues are salient and how those issues are handled in a more democratic fashion.

I personally believe the intellectual freedom awarded to everyone on the internet is probably the greatest benefit of web 2.0. I do, however, recognize that there are many standards and ethics involved with institutionalized journalism that do not translate to someone who is receiving and commenting on news that has already been filtered, and who is working out of her/his basement to create a website that wins traffic. Actually, journalistic integrity often is a burdensome ideal to someone who is trying to gain hits and attention. Also, the art of writing has suffered on the internet because the focus for many writers is on immediacy and volume rather than reflection and accuracy. (Personally, I blame twitter for this… which is why I have a one man boycott going)

Initially, web 2.0 may seem to promote more of a meritocracy in writing, journalism and production. However, when the goal simply becomes to win traffic, the more provocative authors will garner more attention, even when the information produced is skewed to an untruthful degree or rhetorically slanted in some other dishonest way.

So, perhaps in the same way that the greatest failures in our democratic government do not rest solely on the collective shoulders of “thievin’  politicians,” but rather in the inability of voters to decide political contests based on critical public discourse about key issues, rather than the gimmicks, slogans, spins and slanderous sound bites. In this very same way, all of the ills with web 2.0 may center around the lack of media literacy that made television so harmful to uneducated viewers in the 20th century. This new wave of technology and “mini-media” presents new problems, but it also creates tremendous opportunities for teachers to reach students and ask them to critically think about issues in ways that did not exist only a few years ago.

Another interesting phenomenon that may be counter-intuitive to the folks out there that believe web 2.0 is splintering the media, I’d suggest that web 2.0 is actually moving toward conglomeration. In the end, the vast majority of viewers will spend a limited amount of time on popular websites that their friends and family visit, websites with high profile and recognizability. For example, If I want to find sports information or opinions I may look on Espn.com, Foxsports.com or NBA.com. I will never search for a random blog of some unknown guy who lives in Kansas for my sports information. There has become so many different blogs and amateur writers living off of shock value and recycled information that people have begun to revert back to a few websites for information or news. Ultimately, the “Freedom” and variety that web 2.0 represents has become a mirage. As time goes on, more information will be accessible from fewer “giant” websites. Fewer websites will gain more of the “hits,” just as large businesses eventually begin to own larger shares in their respective markets. Blogs will continue to be niche entities that, if they become popular enough will be sucked in by a larger brand. Web 2.0 is not the new frontier anymore, it is just business as usual.

Web 2.0 has become another lesson in government, economics, and human behavior. In all three of those fields of study, the key questions ultimately relate to trust. On the internet, trust is the greatest question of all. What do we trust and how do we know if something is trustworthy? How can we present information in an honest and trustworthy manner? How can we represent ourselves, through our writing, our ideas, our tweets (your tweets… i’m boycotting)  and status updates, or our photos to the world… safely?

I’d hate to end this blog post without answering those questions, but unfortunately those questions may not have simple answers. I believe the answers are situational and can be answered through experience, which we must provide for our future students.