As I started to look at reader 1 I initially got very angry.... why you ask?
As I discovered web 2.0 refers to a generation of web based technologies and social networking sites such as Facebook. For someone reason Facebook makes me very angry. I am bit of a traditionalist and I hate how much time as a nation people spend on there. Initially the only ideas that came to mind where the negative effects that Facebook has on us, particularly that of a younger generation. I have reason to believe that web 2.0 has an adverse effect on-
Language skills- A video posted by National Opera House, 2011 made me question can you imagine if we did talk in Facebook language?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDycZH0CA4I&t=123s
Loneliness/isolation-
As it allows people to communicate with people they don't know its creates 'virtual friendships' are these real friendships?
Cause of mental health- I don't even know where to start? as the reader suggests that web 2.0 allows emancipatory practice. They allow us to present our own filtered sense of reality. How much of what we see from others is actually real? are they really that happy? or have that body? eat that amount? or is it an edited version? This allows people to critically compare lives and measure success and failures in their own lives causing depression, anxiety, eating disorders, low self esteem, body dysmorphia.
Cause of obesity- a recent survery from the Telegraph states that an average person spend 1 hour and 40 minutes each day managing an average of five social media networks (Davidson, L. 2015). With obesity rates in the UK at an all time high what if we stopped as long on these sites and instead did some exercise?
Violence and crime- does having that freedom to voice opinions more widely lead to a conflict causing crime and violence?
As I begun to read further in I slowly discovered that all these negatives where related to using these technologies for social purposes and not as 'professional communication technologies' within the workplace or professional practice. Is this because the personal/social boundaries and professional/social boundaries are blurred on web 2.0?
The reader discuses three competencies that are relevant to the positioning of web 2.0 within professional practice and the workplace. I particularly found the architectures of participation thought provoking. "Participation is a function of our ability to actually participate" (MDXa, 2017). This statement took me back to a film I recently watched (I, Daniel Blake, 2016). In this film the movie highlights how web 2.0 is used a professional tool to help get people back into work. They are required to create a professional profile on the job centre site and use the internet to advocate they are looking for work. However in this film the man looking for work 'Daniel Blake' doesn't have the skills, money or infrastructure to do this. He is from the older generation or after a discussion with mum about this 'lost generation' , he isn't computer literate and or have access to a computer. The scene in which he goes to the job centre to create his profile broke my heart and brought lots of thoughts to mind, which I can now relate to my practice. Is enough being done to educate people about new technologies? are we becoming to reliant on the use of technology particularly web 2.0? how time consuming is the use of tools? is it wrong that we presume everybody nowadays has access to these facilities? whose reasonability is it to keep up to date with the technologies, an individual? or the company in which you work for?
As Hamilton notes "participation is a function, in part, of the reduction of barriers to access (such as time, skill and financial commitment)" (MDXa, 2017). Is enough being done to reduce these barriers? A lot of the skills I have are because I have grown up in the era of technology and before my professional career had started so I was aware of how to use them. But as Ulrich suggests they are "constantly evolving" (MDXa, 2017). Am I also going to get left behind when new features develop? is it up to yourself to develop to keep up to date? but what if I don't have the time to do this? I find it hard enough to keep up to date with my Instagram account, let alone adding twitter, Pinterest etc. but then is this my own fault? is this something as a professional if I choose to use these technologies as a tool to dedicate specific time for?
A report I saw yesterday on BBC Breakfast also highlights one of the architectures of participation. They where looking at how the BBC uses Facebook as a platform for its journalism. One watcher connected them about this -
(BBC, 2017)
Have the BBC been ethical about their decision to embrace new digital technologies and social media as a way that it reaches its audiences? or do they need to take into consideration that not everyone can access or skills to use digital devices? Is it wrong that we just presume everyone nowadays has the skills, time, and money to use these professional technologies? should we make allowances for it?
