I found an article, which questioned the democracy of web 2.0.
Digg, Wikipedia, and the myth of Web 2.0 democracy. - By Chris Wilson - Slate Magazine
I agree with the content of the article, but not with the definition of democracy. It seems that some people think that democracy is a system in which people share the same responsibilities. They say it is not democratic when some people do most of the content contribution at Youtube of Wikipedia.
However, I think 'that' is really democratic. What they call 'democracy' sounds like mechanical equality.
In democracy, people are not required to do the same things. People do what they choose to. And this freedom tends to lead to division of labor, because people differ in what they like to do as well as what they do well.
I think the Digg and Wikipedia are great examples of why the free market economy is a very natural system for a human society. Many web 2.0 sites give equal property for everyone. Everyone is given a free asset. For example, everyone is given the same free blog account. Even so, the outcome is not equal. Someone becomes a celebrity blogger, while many others remain a blog without a reader.
However, a celebrity blogger, who belong to the top 1% of the pyramid, can be one of 99% who are mere consumers at a restaurant. No one can be the 1% in all aspects of our life. Sometimes you lead, and other times you follow.
This is not complicated. It is a simple truth arising from the fact that people differ in their passion and capability. Then we should be doing different, not same, things.
What is this called? It is called division of labor.
Post a Comment