When Jimmy Wales Opened up His Encyclopedia Website to a Passionate Community of Fans, He Transformed a Struggling Business Into the World’S Largest Knowledge Bank

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

When Jimmy Wales Opened up His Encyclopedia Website to a Passionate Community of Fans, He Transformed a Struggling Business Into the World’S Largest Knowledge Bank When Jimmy Wales opened up his encyclopedia website to a passionate community of fans, he transformed a struggling business into the world’s largest knowledge bank. But what can the rest of us learn from Wikipedia? WORDS BY David Mattin | ILLUSTRATION BY Chris Martin sk Jimmy Wales about to help them keep track of the plot. to the staggering growth made possible the meaning of open, So here you have the producers of a by openness, it’s also proof that such and he’ll talk to you mainstream entertainment product openness does not have to come at the about the TV show collaborating with their audience to expense of quality. As early as 2005, Lost. More specifically, help produce future episodes. That’s a study by Nature magazine found about the community of super fans unimaginable only a few years ago. that a selection of Wikipedia’s science who, since Lost first aired in 2004, We’re amid a revolution in participatory entries were as reliable as those in the have collaborated on an encyclopedia media, which has huge implications for Encyclopaedia Britannica. about the show. The ‘Lostpedia,’ which organizations of all kinds.” sits inside Wikia, the lesser known of When Wales pronounces on these o: Openness works. But Wales’ two wiki projects, now contains subjects, people listen. That’s no don’t think that’s the end over 4,500 articles covering every surprise: His status as modern-day of it. Wales believes that episode, character, and plot-twist. And prophet of digital openness is secure the revolution Wikipedia within it, says Wales, lies a lesson in thanks to a certain online encyclopedia helped spearhead is only where we are and what the future holds. that you, along with half a billion just beginning. “I love Lost, and the Lost wiki is one others, probably use regularly. “People want to participate, and of my favorites,” he says. “The fans who Wikipedia, co-founded by Wales and that’s only going to grow. But there’s write these articles want to explain the Larry Sanger in 2001, now contains so much more to come,” he says. show to the world. And they’ve done a over 22m articles, and latest Comscore “We’re going to see new kinds of great job. numbers put monthly users at 490m. sharing and collaboration online. Not “In fact, a while back we heard that While the site – written and edited just text but, thanks to increasing the show’s writers use the Lost wiki entirely by its users – is a testimony bandwidth, video, too. THINK OPEN 33 “Whoever you are, all this has huge implications: For messaging, marketing, design. How do you engage with your customers now? Even if you’re a traditional offline business, you can think about an open web presence and a more open process. It’s not When Wales and Sanger started an enough anymore just to put a comment offshoot community, Wikipedia, that section on your website. It’s about dispensed with the top-down editorial letting your customers collaborate control, user numbers went off the with you to do cool, fun things. There’s chart. Amateur enthusiasts queued still a lot to be learned about what this up by the thousands to write on subjects new age means.” from the Muppets to Munchausen’s while policing standards. Though And everyone, says Wales, should by proxy. anyone can write or edit articles, a start learning. Indeed, anyone that “It turned out that we had the right team of around 1,500 administrators doubts the importance of this emerging initial idea about people: They’re social, – elected by the community – have age of openness need only look to the they want to create. But Nupedia was special powers to reverse edits, lock story of Wikipedia. the wrong model. With Wikipedia, we pages, and settle disputes. Meanwhile, The website grew out of another unlocked people’s passion. That was the a small team of ‘bureaucrats,’ also Wales project, Nupedia, a more difference. It was a learning process all elected, acts as final arbiter. traditional encyclopedia that used along,” he continues. “We didn’t know There are clear lessons, says Wales, expert contributors and conventional where the balance was between how for any organization seeking to create peer review. “Nupedia had a top-down open we could be and how controlling an open online presence. “It’s a mistake structure, which included a seven- we needed to be.” to think that the choice is between top- stage editorial process,” explains Wales. Today, though, Wales has time- down control and anarchy. Openness “We’d started with the idea that there tested answers on that front. The site doesn’t mean anarchy. You have to were lots of smart people online who has evolved a model that combines create social norms that people will want to share their knowledge, but it radical openness with an underlying follow, and that means providing wasn’t working.” social structure that maintains order guidance and a structure. THINK OPEN 34 “With Wikipedia, it’s definitely of a traditional, sales-based business not a case of, ‘Hey, do whatever you harnessing the powerof openness. want, it’s all fine.’ The community has For years, Star Wars fans have been certain values now – on neutrality, for making their own film tributes, using example – that are core to the brand. characters from the original movies. Some were put in place at the start; Since 2002, Lucas has awarded an others have evolved over time. It’s annual prize to the best, making a living, breathing thing, and we’ve certain stipulations about their nature learned that we need to be open to – no nudity or graphic violence – change as we discover new problems and providing a library of music and and new solutions. What stays the sound effects to help. It’s textbook use same is our commitment to an open, of openness according to the Wales consensus-based decision model.” model: Invite participation, provide a framework and some tools, reap rue, the relevance of the rewards. fostering participation and “You can imagine a totally different building communities are way of dealing with fan films, which is more immediately apparent to start suing these people for copyright for online businesses: After all, infringement. Instead, they’ve under- community members are only ever one stood that every new fan film makes click away from becoming customers. new fans for the entire franchise. You’ve But Wales cites George Lucas’ Star got to realize that the people who want Wars franchise (which sold $510m to collaborate with you are also the of toys in 2010) as a great example ones who are going to go out and get others excited about you.” Openness, then, means finding a way to draw these people – Wales calls them ‘influencers’ – to your organization. THINK OPEN 35 His key advice for anybody just starting country, so I’ll outsource the work to them to come together and create cool out? Remember that openness has to a lower cost country.’ Crowdsourcing new things?” start from what your customers want, is the logical extension of that: I’ll The Lost wiki and OfficialStar Wars not what you want from them. outsource the work to the public and Fan Film Awards are just two examples “I dislike the word ‘crowdsourcing’ get it done for free. But, of course, of that empowerment. “If you’re because I think it turns the whole people don’t want to work for free. thinking that way, then you’re going to problem of how to foster openness “You need to go at it from the opposite find the better problems to solve, and upside down in a bad way,” says Wales. direction. Where are communities of you’re much more likely to get results. “Crowdsourcing comes from the word people who are passionate about what These people are out there, they’re ‘outsourcing.’ Outsourcing is about I’m doing, and what are they trying already interested in you, and if you do saying, ‘I have some work I want done, to do themselves? What tools can the right thing they’ll be happy to help I can’t afford workers in a high-cost I give them to help? How can I empower you. You just have to listen to them THINK OPEN 36.
Recommended publications
  • Wikipedia and Intermediary Immunity: Supporting Sturdy Crowd Systems for Producing Reliable Information Jacob Rogers Abstract
    THE YALE LAW JOURNAL FORUM O CTOBER 9 , 2017 Wikipedia and Intermediary Immunity: Supporting Sturdy Crowd Systems for Producing Reliable Information Jacob Rogers abstract. The problem of fake news impacts a massive online ecosystem of individuals and organizations creating, sharing, and disseminating content around the world. One effective ap- proach to addressing false information lies in monitoring such information through an active, engaged volunteer community. Wikipedia, as one of the largest online volunteer contributor communities, presents one example of this approach. This Essay argues that the existing legal framework protecting intermediary companies in the United States empowers the Wikipedia community to ensure that information is accurate and well-sourced. The Essay further argues that current legal efforts to weaken these protections, in response to the “fake news” problem, are likely to create perverse incentives that will harm volunteer engagement and confuse the public. Finally, the Essay offers suggestions for other intermediaries beyond Wikipedia to help monitor their content through user community engagement. introduction Wikipedia is well-known as a free online encyclopedia that covers nearly any topic, including both the popular and the incredibly obscure. It is also an encyclopedia that anyone can edit, an example of one of the largest crowd- sourced, user-generated content websites in the world. This user-generated model is supported by the Wikimedia Foundation, which relies on the robust intermediary liability immunity framework of U.S. law to allow the volunteer editor community to work independently. Volunteer engagement on Wikipedia provides an effective framework for combating fake news and false infor- mation. 358 wikipedia and intermediary immunity: supporting sturdy crowd systems for producing reliable information It is perhaps surprising that a project open to public editing could be highly reliable.
    [Show full text]
  • A Topic-Aligned Multilingual Corpus of Wikipedia Articles for Studying Information Asymmetry in Low Resource Languages
    Proceedings of the 12th Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2020), pages 2373–2380 Marseille, 11–16 May 2020 c European Language Resources Association (ELRA), licensed under CC-BY-NC A Topic-Aligned Multilingual Corpus of Wikipedia Articles for Studying Information Asymmetry in Low Resource Languages Dwaipayan Roy, Sumit Bhatia, Prateek Jain GESIS - Cologne, IBM Research - Delhi, IIIT - Delhi [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract Wikipedia is the largest web-based open encyclopedia covering more than three hundred languages. However, different language editions of Wikipedia differ significantly in terms of their information coverage. We present a systematic comparison of information coverage in English Wikipedia (most exhaustive) and Wikipedias in eight other widely spoken languages (Arabic, German, Hindi, Korean, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish and Turkish). We analyze the content present in the respective Wikipedias in terms of the coverage of topics as well as the depth of coverage of topics included in these Wikipedias. Our analysis quantifies and provides useful insights about the information gap that exists between different language editions of Wikipedia and offers a roadmap for the Information Retrieval (IR) community to bridge this gap. Keywords: Wikipedia, Knowledge base, Information gap 1. Introduction other with respect to the coverage of topics as well as Wikipedia is the largest web-based encyclopedia covering the amount of information about overlapping topics.
    [Show full text]
  • Omnipedia: Bridging the Wikipedia Language
    Omnipedia: Bridging the Wikipedia Language Gap Patti Bao*†, Brent Hecht†, Samuel Carton†, Mahmood Quaderi†, Michael Horn†§, Darren Gergle*† *Communication Studies, †Electrical Engineering & Computer Science, §Learning Sciences Northwestern University {patti,brent,sam.carton,quaderi}@u.northwestern.edu, {michael-horn,dgergle}@northwestern.edu ABSTRACT language edition contains its own cultural viewpoints on a We present Omnipedia, a system that allows Wikipedia large number of topics [7, 14, 15, 27]. On the other hand, readers to gain insight from up to 25 language editions of the language barrier serves to silo knowledge [2, 4, 33], Wikipedia simultaneously. Omnipedia highlights the slowing the transfer of less culturally imbued information similarities and differences that exist among Wikipedia between language editions and preventing Wikipedia’s 422 language editions, and makes salient information that is million monthly visitors [12] from accessing most of the unique to each language as well as that which is shared information on the site. more widely. We detail solutions to numerous front-end and algorithmic challenges inherent to providing users with In this paper, we present Omnipedia, a system that attempts a multilingual Wikipedia experience. These include to remedy this situation at a large scale. It reduces the silo visualizing content in a language-neutral way and aligning effect by providing users with structured access in their data in the face of diverse information organization native language to over 7.5 million concepts from up to 25 strategies. We present a study of Omnipedia that language editions of Wikipedia. At the same time, it characterizes how people interact with information using a highlights similarities and differences between each of the multilingual lens.
    [Show full text]
  • Transformation of Participation in a Collaborative Online Encyclopedia Susan L
    Becoming Wikipedian: Transformation of Participation in a Collaborative Online Encyclopedia Susan L. Bryant, Andrea Forte, Amy Bruckman College of Computing/GVU Center, Georgia Institute of Technology 85 5th Street, Atlanta, GA, 30332 [email protected]; {aforte, asb}@cc.gatech.edu ABSTRACT New forms of computer-supported cooperative work have sprung Traditional activities change in surprising ways when computer- from the World Wide Web faster than researchers can hope to mediated communication becomes a component of the activity document, let alone understand. In fact, the organic, emergent system. In this descriptive study, we leverage two perspectives on nature of Web-based community projects suggests that people are social activity to understand the experiences of individuals who leveraging Web technologies in ways that largely satisfy the became active collaborators in Wikipedia, a prolific, social demands of working with geographically distant cooperatively-authored online encyclopedia. Legitimate collaborators. In order to better understand this phenomenon, we peripheral participation provides a lens for understanding examine how several active collaborators became members of the participation in a community as an adaptable process that evolves extraordinarily productive and astonishingly successful over time. We use ideas from activity theory as a framework to community of Wikipedia. describe our results. Finally, we describe how activity on the In this introductory section, we describe the Wikipedia and related Wikipedia stands in striking contrast to traditional publishing and research, as well as two perspectives on social activity: activity suggests a new paradigm for collaborative systems. theory (AT) and legitimate peripheral participation (LPP). Next, we describe our study and how ideas borrowed from activity Categories and Subject Descriptors theory helped us investigate the ways that participation in the J.7 [Computer Applications]: Computers in Other Systems – Wikipedia community is transformed along multiple dimensions publishing.
    [Show full text]
  • Defining the Digital Services Landscape for the Middle East
    Defining the Digital Services landscape for the Middle East Defining the Digital Services landscape for the Middle East 1 2 Contents Defining the Digital Services landscape for the Middle East 4 The Digital Services landscape 6 Consumer needs landscape Digital Services landscape Digital ecosystem Digital capital Digital Services Maturity Cycle: Middle East 24 Investing in Digital Services in the Middle East 26 Defining the Digital Services landscape for the Middle East 3 Defining the Digital Services landscape for the Middle East The Middle East is one of the fastest growing emerging markets in the world. As the region becomes more digitally connected, demand for Digital Services and technologies is also becoming more prominent. With the digital economy still in its infancy, it is unclear which global advances in Digital Services and technologies will be adopted by the Middle East and which require local development. In this context, identifying how, where and with whom to work with in this market can be very challenging. In our effort to broaden the discussion, we have prepared this report to define the Digital Services landscape for the Middle East, to help the region’s digital community in understanding and navigating through this complex and ever-changing space. Eng. Ayman Al Bannaw Today, we are witnessing an unprecedented change in the technology, media, and Chairman & CEO telecommunications industries. These changes, driven mainly by consumers, are taking Noortel place at a pace that is causing confusion, disruption and forcing convergence. This has created massive opportunities for Digital Services in the region, which has in turn led to certain industry players entering the space in an incoherent manner, for fear of losing their market share or missing the opportunities at hand.
    [Show full text]
  • The Culture of Wikipedia
    Good Faith Collaboration: The Culture of Wikipedia Good Faith Collaboration The Culture of Wikipedia Joseph Michael Reagle Jr. Foreword by Lawrence Lessig The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Web edition, Copyright © 2011 by Joseph Michael Reagle Jr. CC-NC-SA 3.0 Purchase at Amazon.com | Barnes and Noble | IndieBound | MIT Press Wikipedia's style of collaborative production has been lauded, lambasted, and satirized. Despite unease over its implications for the character (and quality) of knowledge, Wikipedia has brought us closer than ever to a realization of the centuries-old Author Bio & Research Blog pursuit of a universal encyclopedia. Good Faith Collaboration: The Culture of Wikipedia is a rich ethnographic portrayal of Wikipedia's historical roots, collaborative culture, and much debated legacy. Foreword Preface to the Web Edition Praise for Good Faith Collaboration Preface Extended Table of Contents "Reagle offers a compelling case that Wikipedia's most fascinating and unprecedented aspect isn't the encyclopedia itself — rather, it's the collaborative culture that underpins it: brawling, self-reflexive, funny, serious, and full-tilt committed to the 1. Nazis and Norms project, even if it means setting aside personal differences. Reagle's position as a scholar and a member of the community 2. The Pursuit of the Universal makes him uniquely situated to describe this culture." —Cory Doctorow , Boing Boing Encyclopedia "Reagle provides ample data regarding the everyday practices and cultural norms of the community which collaborates to 3. Good Faith Collaboration produce Wikipedia. His rich research and nuanced appreciation of the complexities of cultural digital media research are 4. The Puzzle of Openness well presented.
    [Show full text]
  • An Analysis of Contributions to Wikipedia from Tor
    Are anonymity-seekers just like everybody else? An analysis of contributions to Wikipedia from Tor Chau Tran Kaylea Champion Andrea Forte Department of Computer Science & Engineering Department of Communication College of Computing & Informatics New York University University of Washington Drexel University New York, USA Seatle, USA Philadelphia, USA [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Benjamin Mako Hill Rachel Greenstadt Department of Communication Department of Computer Science & Engineering University of Washington New York University Seatle, USA New York, USA [email protected] [email protected] Abstract—User-generated content sites routinely block contri- butions from users of privacy-enhancing proxies like Tor because of a perception that proxies are a source of vandalism, spam, and abuse. Although these blocks might be effective, collateral damage in the form of unrealized valuable contributions from anonymity seekers is invisible. One of the largest and most important user-generated content sites, Wikipedia, has attempted to block contributions from Tor users since as early as 2005. We demonstrate that these blocks have been imperfect and that thousands of attempts to edit on Wikipedia through Tor have been successful. We draw upon several data sources and analytical techniques to measure and describe the history of Tor editing on Wikipedia over time and to compare contributions from Tor users to those from other groups of Wikipedia users. Fig. 1. Screenshot of the page a user is shown when they attempt to edit the Our analysis suggests that although Tor users who slip through Wikipedia article on “Privacy” while using Tor. Wikipedia’s ban contribute content that is more likely to be reverted and to revert others, their contributions are otherwise similar in quality to those from other unregistered participants and to the initial contributions of registered users.
    [Show full text]
  • COI Editing and Its Discontents
    Wikipedia @ 20 Paid With Interest: COI Editing and its Discontents William Beutler Published on: Jun 10, 2019 Updated on: Jun 19, 2019 License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0) Wikipedia @ 20 Paid With Interest: COI Editing and its Discontents Image credit: Jim Pennucci. 1. Everyone involved with Wikipedia has some kind of interest in what it says. In the classic formulation, its volunteer editors are inspired to empower a global audience by compiling information in an accessible format. Practically speaking, though, most participate because the project appeals to their personality, their sense of justice, or there's an ego boost in deciding what the world knows about their pet subject. Its readers care simply because they want to learn something. For the most part, this works very well. Things are rather different when the motivation is financial. Most contributors consider editing Wikipedia to promote a business a morally different endeavor, and its readers, too, may be alarmed to learn some edits are made not to benevolently share knowledge with the world, but because the writer has a material stake in how the topic is represented. And yet the structure of Wikipedia makes this tension inevitable. The site's vast influence owes something to the fact that anyone can influence it, so when those described in its virtual pages decide to do exactly that, the result is one of Wikipedia's most challenging existential dilemmas. Wikipedia's favored terminology for this is "conflict of interest", referred to in shorthand as "COI"— although other terms such as "paid editing" or "paid advocacy" are often encountered.
    [Show full text]
  • Télécharger Le Texte Intégral En Format
    ANNUAIRE FRANÇAIS DE RELATIONS INTERNATIONALES 2019 Volume XX PUBLICATION COURONNÉE PAR L’ACADÉMIE DES SCIENCES MORALES ET POLITIQUES (Prix de la Fondation Edouard Bonnefous, 2008) Université Panthéon-Assas Centre Thucydide AFRI_2019_v3_1124p.indd 3 24/04/2019 11:44 WIKIPÉDIA PAR VALÉRIE NICOLAS (*) Wikipédia (1) est un site Internet collaboratif qui se décrit lui-même comme « encyclopédie en libre accès, en lecture comme en écriture » (2). Multilingue, ce site est servi par un logiciel identique le Mediawiki. Il est adossé à une fondation à but non lucratif Wikimedia, qui assure son fonctionnement et gère d’autres projets frères. Le contenu de Wikipédia est disponible sous licence libre (3). Ainsi chacun peut le recopier, le modifier et l’utiliser. Le projet encyclopédique est alimenté par chaque utilisateur par une écriture collaborative, participative et bénévole. Crée en 2001 par deux ressortissants américains (4), Wikipédia (WP) est en 2014 le 5e site le plus fréquenté au monde (5). 500 millions de visiteurs le consultent chaque mois. Il offre aux lecteurs plus de 30 millions d’articles dans plus de 300 versions linguistiques. La version en anglais – matrice du projet –, compte plus de 5 millions de contributions. Les chiffres sont évocateurs du formidable recueil de connaissances que WP constitue. Internet est le moteur et le vecteur du succès du projet Wikipédia. Internet est un réseau de réseaux informatiques international organisé grâce à un protocole unique de communication (TCP/IP). Outil de communication, le World Wide Web (Web), un des services fournis par le réseau (6), a bouleversé les échanges entre les individus. Le réseau permet leur multiplication sans considération de frontières, ni de temps.
    [Show full text]
  • Le Logiciel Wiki Utilisé Par Wikipédia
    WIKIWIKI Un outil informatique créé par WardWard CunninghamCunningham en 1995, Wiki-wiki : aller vite en hawaïen, Outil collaboratif, Mediawiki : le logiciel wiki utilisé par wikipédia. Ville de Nevers 10/05/2017 PetitePetite histoirehistoire Jimmy Wales (Jimbo) financier ayant fait fortune envisage la création d'une encyclopédie en ligne (Nupédia) Engage Larry Sanger qui propose en 2001 d'utiliser wiki pour faire participer les lecteurs aux articles (qui seraient ensuite mis dans Nupedia...) Ville de Nevers 10/05/2017 DeDe NupediaNupedia àà WikipediaWikipedia (1/2)(1/2) Nupedia (2000) – Fondateurs : Jimmy Wales et Larry Sanger (Portail Bomis) – Objectif : 1ère encyclopédie libre sur internet, à disposition du plus grand nombre (prédécesseurs : Universalis, Encarta, le Quid, Britannica…) – Modèle éditorial calqué sur l'édition traditionnelle : ➔ Recrutement des auteurs conditionné par la possession d'un doctorat ➔ Processus de validation basé sur 7 étapes Assignment -- Finding a lead reviewer -- Lead review -- Open review -- Lead copyediting -- Open copyediting -- Final approval and markup – Résultats : ➔ En 2 ans...24 articles validés et 74 autres en développement ➔ Fermeture définitive en sept. 2003 (après un an d'inactivité) Ville de Nevers 10/05/2017 DeDe NupediaNupedia àà WikipediaWikipedia (2/2)(2/2) Wikipedia (janvier 2001) : – En parallèle, idée d'expérimenter un mode de fonctionnement plus ouvert, facilitant la production collaborative et décentralisée des articles – Au départ, pas de règles précises, pas de position idéologique .., plutôt une « anarchie » bon enfant, et un consensus implicite, autour d'un noyau dur de 200 personnes en provenance de Nupedia – Premières règles qui deviendront les pivots inamovibles du projet : Principes fondateurs 1. Wikipédia est une encyclopédie 2.
    [Show full text]
  • DELTA Summit • Dr Abdalla Kablan, Entrepreneur & Fintech Expert
    INNOVATION STAGE POWERED BY CONFERENCE AGENDA 4TH OCTOBER INSPIRING STORIES 11:30 Welcome to track: Inspiring stories Josh o’Cock | Moderator 11:35 The future of crypto finance in the start-up ecosystem [Keynote] Calvin Cheng 11:50 Blockchain: The disruption in finance [Keynote] Hermann Hauser 12:05 The future of cryptocurrency payments [Keynote] Sanja Kon 12:20 How growth is changing [Fireside Chat] Josh o’Cock | Moderator • David Darmanin 12:35 An entrepreneur’s journey [Keynote] Rahul Sood 12:50 The future of community [Fireside Chat] Tugce Ergul | Moderator • Liz Hagelthorn 13:05 The anthropology of blockchains: Centralization, decentralization, trust and memory [Keynote] Natalie Smolenski FUTURE OF CONNECTIVITY 14:30 Welcome to track: Future of connectivity Luke Todd 14:35 The future of disruption in an AI world [Keynote] Angelo Dalli 14:50 Connectivity 2025 [Panel] Sarah Austin | Moderator • Sonia Hernandez • Harald Rösch • Nikhil Patil 15:20 The digital airline passenger experience [Keynote] Louis Giordimaina 15:35 Preparing for the next wave - IOT, sharing economy, jobs and skill [Keynote] Tanya Sammut Bonnici 15:50 Exploring successful business models with open data [Keynote] Ryan Goodman 16:05 Cloud computing powered blockchain [Keynote] Konstantinos Pantos 16:20 Why your next financial advisor will be a robot [Keynote] Andrew Cachia SPOTLIGHT 16:40 An interview with Edward de Bono [Fireside Chat] Julian Azzopardi | Moderator • Edward de Bono INNOVATION STAGE POWERED BY CONFERENCE AGENDA 5TH OCTOBER SPOTLIGHT 10:00 Smart cities
    [Show full text]
  • Supporting Sensemaking by the Masses for the Public Good
    Supporting Sensemaking by the Masses for the Public Good Derek L. Hansen Assistant Professor, Maryland’s iSchool Director of CASCI (http://casci.umd.edu) Introduction One of the marvels of our time is the unprecedented use and development of technologies that support social interaction. Recent decades have repeatedly demonstrated human ingenuity as individuals and collectives have adopted and adapted these technologies to engender new ways of working, playing, and creating meaning. Although we already take for granted the ubiquity of social-mediating technologies such as email, Facebook, Twitter, and wikis, their potential for improving the human condition has hardly been tapped. There is a great need for researchers to 1) develop theories that better explain how and why technology-mediated collaborations succeed and fail, and 2) develop novel socio-technical strategies to address national priorities such as healthcare, education, government transparency, and environmental sustainability. In this paper, I discuss the need to understand and develop technologies and social structures that support large-scale, collaborative sensemaking. Sensemaking Humans can’t help but try to make sense of the world around them. When faced with an unfamiliar problem or situation we instinctively gather, organize, and interpret information, constructing meanings that enable us to move forward (Dervin, 1998; Lee & Abrams 2008; Russell, et al., 2008.). Individuals engage in sensemaking activities when we create a presentation, come to grips with a life-threatening illness, decide who to vote for, or produce an intelligence report. As collectives we engage in collaborative sensemaking activities at many levels of social aggregation ranging from small groups (e.g., co-authors of a paper) to hundreds (e.g., the scientific community developing a cure for cancer) to millions (e.g., fans of ABC’s Lost making sense of the complex show).
    [Show full text]