W5 : Do you think wikipedia is right to reject censorship? / 박소민(SOMIN PARK)

 1. Summary

Wikipedia is a multilingual Internet encyclopedia that anyone can write freely. Like regular encyclopedias, Wikipedia should also try to convey objective information as much as possible, without anyone's opinion being strongly involved. In this regard, it is natural that Wikipedia refuses to censor. And I am strongly convinced that if Wikipedia had complied with all China, France and Russia's requests for censorship, it would have been a history book containing one's claims, not an Internet encyclopedia.

2. Interesting point

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/aug/06/wikipedia-censorship-right-to-be-forgotten-ruling

I was very surprised to see that Google had asked Wikipedia for censorship. Google restricted Wikipedia's links following the European court's decision to recognize the "right to be forgotten" and asked Wikipedia to delete five Internet links. It was interesting to see Wikipedia's "right to remember" and Google's "right to be forgotten" conflict with each other.

3. Discussion point

What should be prioritized between the right to be forgotten and the right to remember? Or is one of them unnecessary?

Comments

  1. Sohee HeoApril 2, 2021 at 1:01 AM

    I think the right to be remembered should be prioritized. I think that all records should remain and that people should be able to make full use of them in the future. This is because history is thought to be a prior instruction to the future.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yang Ruixin 양서영April 2, 2021 at 7:38 AM

    I agree with you!
    Wikipediaipedia's founder, jimmy wales, has said that wikipedia is neither critical nor supportive of other governments. Wikipedia is not a website for political dissidents or government supporters. Wikipedia is neutral. Wikipedia's policy of neutrality is unwavering.
    The interesting thing to think about is Wikipedia can not be described as anti-government —— unless the government wants to state that neutral information is anti-government.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Park Chan Young (박찬영)April 3, 2021 at 5:57 PM

    I think the right to remember is more important in the public realm. One of the important goals of journalism is to protect the people's right to know. If the right to know disappears due to the right to be forgotten, then the right to know is violated. Issues that are considered more important to the public interest, such as the disclosure of criminals in a murder case, should not be forgotten.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W7: Review of Good Faith Collaboration / Suyoung Han

  Review of Good Faith Collaboration 1) Summary – Wikipedia from an ethnographic perspective: focusing on collaboration within the community Wikipedia, which is called the world's largest encyclopedia, is an open community and is becoming more and more solid with the participation of various people, conflict, and resolution. In this respect, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. attempted to explain the culture that takes place within Wikipedia. The book describes how Wikipedia was created and what it values. In particular, he described Wikipedia in a book from an ethnographic point of view, and focused on cooperation within the community. 2) Interesting Point – Wikipedia is simple, but not I realized that Wikipedia is not just a site made up of community activities, but rather a collaborative activity that is carried out concretely for the goal. Before I read the book, Wikipedia was an encyclopedia site that only gave me information (even I didn't trust the information), and I thought ...
Read more

W10 : Can we think of some example of how Internet has changed our culture? / 박소민(SOMIN PARK)

 1. Summary  The Internet has changed our culture so much. First, through the Internet, we can meet people regardless of distance. People in each country communicated over the Internet and reduced the barriers to distance by creating relationships. Also, the Internet has let us stay away from books. When we want to find expertise, we can get it from Wikipedia or Google. Even information in books can be obtained through e-books, reducing access to libraries and paper books. 2. Interesting point Further to the above, our brains are gradually degenerating because we don't have to remember information. We are constantly interrupted by SNS notifications ringing on our phones when we do something, so our concentration and attention are being reduced. Furthermore, the ease of obtaining information online is causing our short-term memory to decline. 3. Discussion point I think the Internet has made it easy to sever a relationship with a person because we can meet another person simply...
Read more

w9: Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? LiuXinlei

 Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? In terms of the comprehensiveness of the content, we have to admit the advantages of Wikipedia. For example, Wikipedia is undoubtedly my first choice when I don't understand an event at all. It is convenient, fast and comprehensive, and I can spend the least time to understand the whole content of this fact as comprehensively and neutrally as possible. But in the process of in-depth learning, Wikipedia can only be used as an introductory content, because in learning we need to understand this fact as much as possible, and we need to understand the different views of scholars in different regions on the same event. There will be different theories. Some theories seem to be not neutral or even discriminatory or ethnographic at present (such as Marxism and Marxism in China), and it is not suitable for Wikipedia. Be shown. In short, Wikipedia has a very low threshold for users. It assu...
Read more