Wikipedia's Gender Gap and Disciplinary Praxis
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Fall 2018 (2:2) 6 Wikipedia’s Gender Gap and Disciplinary Praxis: Representing Women Scholars in Digital Rhetoric and Writing Fields Matthew A. Vetter, John Andelfinger, Shahla Asadolahi, Wenqi Cui, Jialei Jiang, Tyrone Jones, Zeeshan F. Siddique, Inggrit O. Tanasale, Awouignandji Ebenezer Ylonfoun, and Jiawei Xing, Indiana University of Pennsylvania Wikipedia’s gender gaps, the result of a predominance of male editors and the correlating uneven participation and coverage of marginalized groups, are by now both well-known and well-documented (Cohen, 2011; Collier and Bear, 2012; Glott, Schmidt, and Ghosh, 2010; Gruwell, 2015; Wadewitz, 2013). This article seeks to interrogate these gaps in coverage as they manifest in discipline-specific representations, especially representations related to the academic fields of computers and writing, digital literacy, and digital rhetoric. Preliminary analysis of articles related to these fields demonstrates a severe lack of coverage which, given these fields’ attention to digital literacies, should be improved. This article employs a bibliometric method of citation analysis (Eyman, 2015; Kaur, Radicchi, and Menczer, 2013) across five Wikipedia articles related to these fields to show how the gender gap manifests in the absence of cited research by non-male scholars. To address these content gaps, co- authors of this article move beyond analysis to define and engage in acts of critical digital praxis within Wikipedia, editing the encyclopedia to improve representation of women and women’s research in computers and writing and digital rhetoric fields. Descriptions of such editorial work and its implications, furthermore, provide a model for disciplinary praxis, and graduate pedagogy, in which authors work together to engage in the critique and remediation of Wikipedia’s disciplinary content and gender gaps. As a larger example of critical digital analysis and participation, this article also aspires to unpack and critique the ways in which media, even those professing an open-access and democratic ethic, perpetuate social hegemonies of marginalization. 1. Introduction: The Free democratic process to build a global Encyclopedia Anyone [White repository of knowledge. However, Wikipedia’s gender gaps—the result of a Males] Can Edit predominance of male editors and the Incredibly successful in terms of size correlating uneven participation and and scope, Wikipedia is often praised for coverage of marginalized groups—are by its collaborative model in which self- now both well-known and well- motivated editors work through a documented (Cohen, 2011; Collier and 7 Journal of Multimodal Rhetorics Bear, 2012; Glott, Schmidt, and Ghosh, addition, Eszter Hargittai and Aaron Shaw 2010; Gruwell, 2015; Wadewitz, 2013). (2014) found that Wikipedia’s gender bias According to a global Wikipedia survey might be caused by women’s low internet conducted by a partnership between skill or lack of interest. Adrienne United Nations University and UNU- Wadewitz (2013), forwarding a more MERIT, only 13% of Wikipedia sensitive and nuanced perspective, argued contributors are women (Glott, Schmidt, that women—who typically are expected and Ghosh, 2010). While there has been to perform more invisible and unpaid some improvement in these numbers since labor in their lives—have less free time to this initial survey, more recent studies devote to volunteer projects such as demonstrate how the lack of women Wikipedia. editors contributes to ongoing problems Whatever its cause, the lack of women of gender representation. For instance, a editors has concrete consequences 2017 study of biographical articles in regarding what’s represented in the Wikipedia across languages found that encyclopedia. Noam Cohen (2011) only 17% of the biographies in the English tracked some of these consequences Wikipedia focused on women figures through a (somewhat heteronormative and (“Wikipedia Human Gender Indicator,” simplistic) analysis of representation, 2017). Wikipedia’s problematic gender noting that traditionally “male” subjects, politics exemplify the androcentric norms such as toy soldiers or baseball cards, are that often define online cultures and often elaborated on in a lengthy article, gender differences among males’ and while many subjects favorable to female females’ internet usage (Joiner et al., audiences are underrepresented. It is 2005). Beyond gender, Wikipedians are important to realize, however, that also typically technically skillful, formally gender gaps on Wikipedia have educated, English speakers, age 15–49, substantial, negative impacts beyond from developed and majority-Christian coverage of the subjects discussed by nations (“Wikipedia: Systemic Bias,” Cohen. As Wadewitz (2013) has 2017). recognized, “Wikipedia’s sexism lessens Speculation on why this unevenness of its legitimacy as a producer and organizer participation emerges varies by research of knowledge” and forfeits its goals of and researcher positionality, and often diversity and openness. perpetuates or advances heteronormative Wikipedia’s gender problems go or stereotypical discourses. Benjamin beyond content gaps or participation, Collier and Julia Bear (2012) posited that however. The encyclopedia’s adherence to one possible reason for women’s western, logocentric norms of knowledge reluctance to contribute might be related production limit its capacity to welcome to a negative self-perception regarding diverse epistemologies (Gruwell, 2015; their knowledge or ability, or a general Vetter and Pettiway, 2017). Unlike male discomfort in editing others’ work. In editors, who tend to write more Fall 2018 (2:2) 8 “objectively,” female editors, more often Wikipedia edits described in this article than not, engage their bodily experience (as well as the drafting of this article itself) in writing (Gruwell, 2015). Wikipedia were a collaborative course assignment in fails to “accommodate feminist ways of English 808: Technology and Literacy. But knowing and writing” and instead they were also more than that: an attempt facilitates “reduced notions of objectivity” to move beyond traditional academic (Gruwell, 2015, p. 121). More broadly, curricula and to practice a type of research because Wikipedia fails to create a that valorizes doing (praxis) over other genuinely diverse and multivocal space types of both primary and secondary that includes and encourages women’s research that emphasize reviewing, voices, the encyclopedia favors gendered collecting and analyzing as epistemological norms and epistemologies to the exclusion processes. Accordingly, this article—in of a more democratic and multicultural its discussion and interrogation of encyclopedia. Wikipedia’s disciplinary gender gap— In this article, we seek to interrogate attempts to work towards two central Wikipedia’s gender problems further, goals. First, our analysis of articles related especially as such problems manifest in to computers and writing, digital rhetoric, discipline-specific coverage of subjects and digital literacy, demonstrates how the related to the academic fields of gender gap emerges and influences computers and writing, digital literacy, Wikipedia’s production of knowledge and digital rhetoric. Our focus on content within a disciplinary ecology. Second, and related to these academic fields emerges in response to the findings from this from the situated context in which this analysis, we also move beyond analytics to article was envisioned and written: a define and engage in acts of digital praxis doctoral-level seminar in Technology and within Wikipedia, editing the Literacy we participated in (as professor encyclopedia to improve representation of and students) in the Composition and women and women’s research within the Applied Linguistics PhD Program at disciplines explored. Indiana University of Pennsylvania. In In the following sections, we attempt addition to exploring the digital and to theorize the type of digital praxis we cultural ramifications of Wikipedia’s engaged in as critical reflection and action. gender gap, this project helped us achieve We see such praxis as having very real the objectives of learning and applying material and multimodal effects, especially conceptual knowledge from these fields. as we seek to remediate Wikipedia’s Beyond traditional academic goals, we discursive representation of women were also interested in engaging a mode of scholars—and the accompanying cultural intellectual work that eschews normative capital and ethos production that academic spaces and epistemologies for accompanies such representation. Our more public, intellectual writing as digital theoretical framing of this work (see action. The citation analysis and Section 2) introduces and contextualizes 9 Journal of Multimodal Rhetorics both the analytical and reflective accounts 2012). This article also responds to a of our engagement with digital praxis. recent feminist rhetorical analysis of Our procedure for a type of citation Wikipedia’s epistemological practices analysis (see Section 3) seeks to quantify performed by Leigh Gruwell in which she and materialize the omission of women calls for more critical pedagogical scholars from discipline-specific articles. approaches to the online encyclopedia Furthermore, our reflection (see Section (2015). 4) on the specific accounts of editorial praxis—what was added to specific 2.1 FROM MEDIA PRAXIS TO CRITICAL Wikipedia articles—is also grounded in DIGITAL PRAXIS this theory. In the final section, we Media praxis has its