The Case of Wikipedia

In this paper we propose a theoretical framework to understand the governance of internet-mediated social production. Focusing on one of the most popular websites and reference tools, Wikipedia, we undertake an exploratory theoretical analysis to clarify the structure and mechanisms driving the endogenous change of a large-scale social production system. We argue that the popular transactions costs approach underpinning many of the analyses is an insufficient framework for unpacking the evolutionary character of governance. The evolution of Wikipedia and its shifting modes of governance can be better framed as a process of building a collective capability, namely the capability of editing and managing a new kind of encyclopedia. We understand Wikipedia evolution as a learning phenomenon that gives over time rise to governance mechanisms and structures as endogenous responses to the problems and conditions that the ongoing development of Wikipedia itself has produced over the years. Finally, we put forward five empirical hypotheses to test the theoretical framework

From printed to "wikified" encyclopedias: sociological aspects of an incipient cultural revolution

1. Introductory remarks; 2. The new "asymmetric competition" between open source networks and conventional bureaucratic organizations; 3. The Wikipedia as an encyclopedic project; 4. “Wikis” as tools for focused and cumulative intellectual productions; 5. Six Dimensions of WP growth and evolution; 5.1 Worldwide multilingual diffusion; 5.2 Staff expansion; 5.3 Diversification; 5.4 Elaboration; 5.5. Increases in internal cohesion; 5.6. External Embedment; 6. On the potentials and limits of wiki-based open source encyclopedias: some preliminary conclusions after six years of experience; 6.1 Free self-recruitment of collaborators; 6.2 Extensive and efficient exploitation of intrinsic motivations; 6.3 Low needs for capital and organization; 6.4 Multicultural segmentation; 6.5 Flexible polymorphic organization; 6.6 Community embedment; 6.7 Keeping pace with current events and discoveries; 6.8 Changing usage patterns and user roles; 6.9 Public visibility of production processes and resilient adaptation; 5.10 Unguided incrementalism and unplanned “memetic evolution”; 6.11 "WP-Notability" as a new digital divide; 7. Conclusive remarks; Reference

Wikipedia Conflict Representation in Articles of War: A critical discourse analysis of current, on-going, socio-political Wikipedia articles about war

With the help of a discourse-historical approach, a textual corpus composed of the talk pages of three controversial, socio-political Wikipedia articles about ongoing wars was analyzed in order to shed light on the way in which conflict is represented through the editing and discussion process. Additionally, a rational discourse was employed in order to unravel communication distortions within the editing process in an attempt to improve communication and consensus-seeking. Finally, semi-structured interviews of participating contributors within studied articles were used in order to better understand Wikipedian experience in a controversial collaboration scenario. Results unveiled a set of discursive practices in which Wikipedians participate, as well as the creation of a Wikipedian argumentation topoi framework useful for further Wikipedia-specific discourse analysis involving the content change-retain negotiation process

Public relations interactions with Wikipedia

This original research paper considers the relevance of the institutional analysis and development (IAD) framework of Nobel proxe-winning economist Elior Ostrom (1990) in understanding the incentives for public relations (PR) practitioners’ interactions with Wikipedia and other common-pool media. Purpose The purpose of this paper is to consider the relevance of the institutional analysis and development (IAD) framework (Ostrom, 1990) in understanding the incentives for public relations (PR) practitioners’ interactions with Wikipedia, and other common-pool media. Design/methodology/approach This interdisciplinary conceptual paper applies the economics theory of commons governance to two case studies of PR interactions with Wikipedia. Findings The analysis concludes that commons governance theory identifies the downside risks of opportunistic behaviour by PR practitioners in their interactions with media commons such as Wikipedia. The paper concludes that Ostrom’s IAD model is relevant to the governance of PR interactions and offers guidance on productive PR practice in common-pool media. Research limitations/implications The analysis was applied to only two cases for which information was widely available. Practical implications The paper includes implications for the scope of PR practice in its interactions with common-pool media. The economic value of information held by PR professionals has been undermined by the collaborative nature of common-pool media, which has consequences for the role of PR. Originality/value The paper introduces an economic theory and related literature to PR scholarship and applies them to PR practice. The paper aims to stimulate further research into the application of economic ideas to PR practice and to encourage discussion on the place of economic theory in PR knowledge

In Defense on Online Intermediary Immunity: Facilitating Communities of Modified Exceptionalism

In the ten years since its enactment, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA) has become perhaps the single most significant statute in the regulation of online content, and one of the most heavily criticized. Many early commentators criticized both Congress, for its apparent inability to craft the more limited statute it intended, and the courts, for interpreting the statute broadly and failing to limit its reach. Later commentators focus more clearly on policy concerns, contending that the failure to impose liability on intermediaries fails to effectuate principles of efficiency and cost avoidance. This article takes the opposing view, in defense of broad Section 230 immunity. It argues that the immunity provisions of Section 230 play a significant role in broader questions of Internet governance. Specifically, Section 230 immunity provides a means of working within the sovereign legal system to effectuate many of the goals, ideals and realities of the Internet exceptionalism, cyberlibertarian movements. By mitigating the imposition of certain external legal norms in the online environment, Section 230 helps to create the initial condition necessary for the development of a modified form exceptionalism. With the impact of external norms diminished, Web 2.0 communities, such as wikis and social networks, have emerged to facilitate a limited market in norms and values, and to provide internal enforcement mechanisms that allow new communal norms to emerge. Section 230 plays a vital role in this process of building heterogeneous communities that encourage collaborative production and communication. Efforts to reform or restrict Section 230 immunity are therefore unnecessary and unwise

In Defense on Online Intermediary Immunity: Facilitating Communities of Modified Exceptionalism

In the ten years since its enactment, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA) has become perhaps the single most significant statute in the regulation of online content, and one of the most heavily criticized. Many early commentators criticized both Congress, for its apparent inability to craft the more limited statute it intended, and the courts, for interpreting the statute broadly and failing to limit its reach. Later commentators focus more clearly on policy concerns, contending that the failure to impose liability on intermediaries fails to effectuate principles of efficiency and cost avoidance. This article takes the opposing view, in defense of broad Section 230 immunity. It argues that the immunity provisions of Section 230 play a significant role in broader questions of Internet governance. Specifically, Section 230 immunity provides a means of working within the sovereign legal system to effectuate many of the goals, ideals and realities of the Internet exceptionalism, cyberlibertarian movements. By mitigating the imposition of certain external legal norms in the online environment, Section 230 helps to create the initial condition necessary for the development of a modified form exceptionalism. With the impact of external norms diminished, Web 2.0 communities, such as wikis and social networks, have emerged to facilitate a limited market in norms and values, and to provide internal enforcement mechanisms that allow new communal norms to emerge. Section 230 plays a vital role in this process of building heterogeneous communities that encourage collaborative production and communication. Efforts to reform or restrict Section 230 immunity are therefore unnecessary and unwise

In Defense of Online Intermediary Immunity: Facilitating Communities of Modified Exceptionalism

This is the published version

The Trouble with Knowing: Wikipedian consensus and the political design of encyclopedic media

Encyclopedias are interfaces between knowing and the unknown. They are devices that negotiate the middle ground between incompatible knowledge systems while also performing as dream machines that explore the political outlines of an enlightened society. Building upon the insights from critical feminist theory, media archaeology, and science and technology studies, the dissertation investigates how utopian and impossible desires of encyclopedic media have left a wake of unresolvable epistemological crises. In a 2011 survey of editors of the online encyclopedia Wikipedia, it was reported that 87 per cent of Wikipedians identified as men. This statistic flew in the face of Wikipedias utopian promise that it was an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Despite the early optimism and efforts to reduce this disparity, Wikipedias parent organization acknowledged its inability to significantly make Wikipedia more equitable. This matter of concern raised two questions: What kinds of knowing subjects is Wikipedia designed to cultivate and what does this conflict over who is included and excluded within Wikipedia tell us about the utopian dreams that are woven into encyclopedic media? This dissertation argues that answering these troubling questions requires an examination of the details of the present, but also the impossible desires that Wikipedia inherited from its predecessors. The analysis of these issues begins with a genealogy of encyclopedias, encyclopedists, encyclopedic aesthetics, and encyclopedisms. It is followed by an archeology of the twentieth century deployment of consensus as an encyclopedic and political program. The third part examines how Wikipedia translated the imaginary ideal of consensus into a cultural technique. Finally, the dissertation mobilizes these analyses to contextualize how consensus was used to limit the dissenting activities of Wikipedia's Gender Gap Task Force. The dissertation demonstrates that the desire and design of encircling knowledge through consensus cultivated Wikipedias gender gap. In this context, if encyclopedic knowledge is to remain politically and culturally significant in the twenty-first century, it is necessary to tell a new story about encyclopedic media. It must be one where an attention to utopian imaginaries, practices, and techniques not only addresses how knowledge is communicated but also enables a sensitivity to the question of who can know