w5:Do you think wikipedia is right to reject censorship?|LiuXinlei

 Do you think wikipedia is right to reject censorship??




On the one hand, as a relatively equal platform, Wikipedia has been committed to constructing neutral information. Just like the rules of the platform, everyone is welcome to participate in the editing and expand the knowledge of Wikipedia. But we have to admit that it is precisely because of the diversity of Wikipedia participants that leads to people with various political positions in the content of Wikipedia.

The blockade of Wikimedia in Mainland China means that the government of the People’s Republic of China or network operators in Mainland China have adopted technical settings since June 2004 to prevent netizens in Mainland China from accessing some or all of the project websites under the Wikimedia Foundation. , The most influential one is Chinese Wikipedia. It is generally believed that this is caused by the Chinese government's censorship and blocking of sensitive content in the Wikimedia Foundation project. Not only Wikipedia, many world-renowned social networks are not available in mainland China, including a series of products such as Google. Although there are software and network services corresponding to positioning in China, we have to admit that, This move by the Chinese government has caused a certain degree of information blockage for the Chinese people. When we put this incident in the case of Wikipedia, I think it is because there is information on Wikipedia that corresponds to the position of the Chinese government. In Chinese media reports, this information is often referred to as "overseas lawless forces." "But at the same time, the Chinese people can only understand the Chinese history that is missing from the Internet in China by jumping over the barriers of information. There is a concept in communication that has only emerged in recent years. It is called "information cocoon room". It means that people often come into contact with people who have the same or similar opinions and choose to contact only relevant reports and information, which leads to people becoming more confident about themselves. belief. I think that Wikipedia's refusal to censor and adopt an open and equal information platform is a way to break the "information cocoon." It is beneficial to the development of human knowledge dissemination.

On the other hand, Wikipedia, which lacks a specific censorship system, often has problems. In terms of political orientation, a lot of information is defined as politically inclined, which leads to frequent disputes in Wikipedia, which requires the emergence of mediators to improve. Back to the beginning, the basic form of information dissemination is precisely because of the famous influence of Wikipedia, many people who do not know the relevant knowledge will believe in some unconfirmed false information, which is often used in commercial propaganda and political propaganda. I think in this respect, Wikipedia needs to be improved again.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

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

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