As part of this week’s assignment for class in Digital Culture, we had to examine Prof. Wolff’s packet of readings compiled for the purpose of understanding Web 2.0.
My analysis consisted of four items on the list, all of which, I believe, hold a significant place in explaining web 2.0.
As We May Think (Bush 1945) is an article written decades ago before the creation of the world wide web. The importance of this article, though others may disagree, is the historical context it gives to the concept of Web 2.0. It does the job of laying a foundation for one to build on, creating a better understanding of the abstract concept. It is absolutely approprite for the purpose of this list.
Two interactive sites I also found approproate for the list included Lovelines (Harris 2006) and We Feel Fine (Harris 2006). Both embody the characteristics that describe web 2.0 and let the reader experience that. Interactive examples truly help one gain a better understanding of any topic becasue the user becomes part of it. Both of these sites I encourage anyone to use to get a better idea of the capabilities of web 2.0 and what sets it apart from web 1.0.
Finally, O’Reilly’s (2005) article, What is Web 2.0 makes a thorough attempt at defining web 2.0 by dissecting it and looking at it from all different angles. It includes examples, comaprisons and diagrams. If you had never even heard the term, web 2.0, you would have a pretty good understanding of it after reading this article.
One suggestion I made was to include a reading about the conflicting views about Twitter. There was a Twitter article in the packet, however it was a very one-sided view of the social networking site. There seems to so much more to it. I think if Prof. Wolff wants to include Twitter in the packet he should include a reading that more thoroughly encompasses all that is being said about it.

