Today's Web has become fertile soil for personal publishing. Not only is it easy to get your voice out...
Here's an article from our blog. This is a "permalink" page, which just means it's not going anywhere, in case you want to bookmark it or link to it from another site.
posted by Jay on July 6th, 2007
in on people, resources, web 2.0, website
I’ve been IMing and emailing people about David Silver’s summary of his lecture on The Power of Web 2.0. It’s a concise and balanced description and critique of web 2.0.
I actually like the basic definition of web 2.0 that David gives—probably the best definition of web 2.0 that I’ve seen:
web 2.0 sites are less about lectures (broadcast) and more about conversation (participation)
I like how the definition offers a clean, categorical contrast between lectures / broadcast and conversations / participation. Unlike almost all other web 2.0 definitions, one could probably use David’s definition to graph a progression from web 1.0 to web 2.0 across some websites.
David does critique a number of things about the veracity of web 2.0, e.g., are web 2.0 sites actually more about conversation than earlier sites? I’ve also critiqued this—particularly the (mis)use of the word “conversation,” in my post on The web is a conversational medium of connections. (David also left a good comment on that post.)
David’s definition does make me think of something that seems useful to say, but that’s a bit more independent of the web 2.0 hype:
Publishing on the web used to be more about publishing (because that’s what people knew), but it’s becoming more and more about the the web.
And, as I suggested in my post on Web. verb, as in, to Web. . ., more and more, we realize we’re not so much doing anything on the web—actually, we are doing the web. We web!
1 comment follows:
add your own comments:
Or, if you'd like, you could leave a trackback from your own site.
...but your voice is heard, acknowledged,
and in many cases, responded to by interested intelligent readers who have found your work most likely because they sought it out and are happy to have found it.
—Biz Stone
Blogging: Genius Strategies
for Instant Web Content
thanks, jay, for taking my blog post seriously and for sharing it with others.
um, i too like my definition of web 2.0 but i like even more how you add an “s” after conversation to make it:
web 2.0 sites are less about lectures (broadcast) and more about conversations (participation).
i’ve liked the phrase we web since the first time i saw you use it. i do think that semantically and metaphorically it explains what many of us (and more and more as these tools go more mainstream) while on the web: we web.