There’s currently a heated controversy going on in my head regarding folksonomies, Web 2.0, and Commons Knowledge. The humanitarian side of me who advocates for justice, equality, and giving power to the people, is clashing with the other side of me who wants to become a journalist and wants to make a living out of it. I am definitely not the kind of person who measures success with dollars earned, but as I get more familiar with my profession as an online content writer I realize how important it is for me to receive some credit, appreciation, and respect for my work. I certainly am a proponent of providing quality education for all and opening the doors of knowledge to everyone, which is why I support what Wikipedia does with peer production. However, I do believe that there should be a line of differentiation between the content produced by amateurs and the content produced by professionals.
The content produced by internet users represents the voices of the people who are not involved in the institutionalized hierarchy of scholarly/academic information. It is certainly a great opportunity for the audience to interact with and provide feedback to those who create the mainstream and have the power in the media world. It is a voice and a window that should be kept for users and should be respected. Yet, there should be strong boundaries regarding using other people’s work without providing any credit, and assigning arbitrary categories to certain concepts online.
I believe that valuable, proven, and professional knowledge should be shared with everyone equally. It might be an Utopian goal to achieve, but it would promote education and equality. However, there should be a respect for the author’s work disregarding the liberty that the internet has provided. I believe that folksonomies are randomly and arbitrarily organized categories that may cause confusion and chaos. There should be, for instance, a non-biased organization that organizes in a more accurate and productive way, the vast amount of information that the internet offers. As Lievrouw states on Alternative and Activist New Media: “The organization of (online) information is always radically incomplete, fragmented, and in flux. From the perspective of established disciplines, expert knowledge, and the cultural institutions that support them, this is a crucial weakness of Web-based information.”