Coercion or empowerment? Moderation of content in Wikipedia as 'essentially contested' bureaucratic rules
Ethics and Information Technology 14 (2):123-135 (2012)
|Abstract||In communities of user-generated content, systems for the management of content and/or their contributors are usually accepted without much protest. Not so, however, in the case of Wikipedia, in which the proposal to introduce a system of review for new edits (in order to counter vandalism) led to heated discussions. This debate is analysed, and arguments of both supporters and opponents (of English, German and French tongue) are extracted from Wikipedian archives. In order to better understand this division of the minds, an analogy is drawn with theories of bureaucracy as developed for real-life organizations. From these it transpires that bureaucratic rules may be perceived as springing from either a control logic or an enabling logic. In Wikipedia, then, both perceptions were at work, depending on the underlying views of participants. Wikipedians either rejected the proposed scheme (because it is antithetical to their conception of Wikipedia as a community) or endorsed it (because it is consonant with their conception of Wikipedia as an organization with clearly defined boundaries). Are other open-content communities susceptible to the same kind of ‘essential contestation’?|
|Keywords||Bureaucracy Control Empowerment Moderation Trust Vandalism Wikipedia|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
P. D. Magnus (2009). On Trusting WIKIPEDIA. Episteme 6 (1):74-90.
Adele Santana & Donna J. Wood (2009). Transparency and Social Responsibility Issues for Wikipedia. Ethics and Information Technology 11 (2):133-144.
Lawrence M. Sanger (2009). The Fate of Expertise After WIKIPEDIA. Episteme 6 (1):52-73.
Paul B. de Laat (2010). How Can Contributors to Open-Source Communities Be Trusted? On the Assumption, Inference, and Substitution of Trust. Ethics and Information Technology 12 (4):327-341.
Paul B. de Laat (2012). Open Source Production of Encyclopedias: Editorial Policies at the Intersection of Organizational and Epistemological Trust. Social Epistemology 26 (1):71-103.
K. Brad Wray (2009). The Epistemic Cultures of Science and WIKIPEDIA: A Comparison. Episteme 6 (1):38-51.
Deborah Perron Tollefsen (2009). WIKIPEDIA and the Epistemology of Testimony. Episteme 6 (1):8-24.
P. D. Magnus (2006). Epistemology and the Wikipedia. North American Computing and Philosophy Conference.
David Milne, Catherine Legg, Medelyan Olena & Witten Ian (2009). Mining Meaning From Wikipedia. International Journal of Human-Computer Interactions 67 (9):716-754.
Olena Medelyan & Catherine Legg (2008). Integrating Cyc and Wikipedia: Folksonomy Meets Rigorously Defined Common-Sense. Proceedings of Wikipedia and AI Workshop at the AAAI-08 Conference. Chicago, US, July 12 2008..
Samuel Sarjant, Catherine Legg, Olena Medelyan & Michael Robinson (2009). “All You Can Eat” Ontology-Building: Feeding Wikipedia to Cyc. IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence (WI-09), 15 – 18 September 2009 Università Degli Studi di Milano Bicocca, Milano, Italy.
Damien Smith Pfister (2011). Networked Expertise in the Era of Many-to-Many Communication: On Wikipedia and Invention. Social Epistemology 25 (3):217 - 231.
Catherine Legg & Samuel Sarjant (2012). Bill Gates is Not a Parking Meter: Philosophical Quality Control in Automated Ontology Building. Proceedings of the Symposium on Computational Philosophy, AISB/IACAP World Congress 2012 (Birmingham, England, July 2-6).
Added to index2012-02-25
Total downloads7 ( #142,233 of 722,764 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #36,437 of 722,764 )
How can I increase my downloads?