Difference between revisions of "Web 2.0 Article for Presbyterian Outlook"

From Neal's Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(→‎Define Web 2.0 briefly with examples like Facebook, YouTube, WIkipedia.)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
==Define Web 2.0 briefly with examples like Facebook, YouTube, WIkipedia.==
 
==Define Web 2.0 briefly with examples like Facebook, YouTube, WIkipedia.==
 +
In the beginning, there was Gutenberg.  Those who owned printing presses printed the text, and everyone else merely read it. To be sure, copies of a text might be circulated among friends, discussed around the dinner table, or used to prop up a short table leg -- but the text itself remained static. Any underlined passages or notes in the margin remained isolated from the general public, existing solely in that copy of the text.
  
−
(Some rambling thoughts here -- need to chop down)
+
The beginning of the internet (what we'll call "Web 1.0) was much the same:  Websites were created by a limited few  who had the technical or financial resources to do so.  The World Wide Web was a great source of information, but not really a means of self-expression or conversation for the masses. 
  
−
In the beginning, there was Gutenberg.  If you owned a printing press, you printed the text, and everyone else read it--and that's about all they could do, short of using your text to prop up a loose table leg.  The beginning of the internet (what we'll call "Web 1.0) was much the same:  If you knew how to create a website, you put information on it, and everyone else read it.  That's all--a static web.  But these days, if you go to a website, it's likely you can (after reading it) change it too, by adding your own thoughts, reactions and comments right there--on someone else's website.  Many sites now allow you to add your own labels or "tags" to the content you find there, or add pictures, documents, or even entirely new pages on entirely new topics. You might vote on some of the content, raising or lowering its prominence on the site.  The owner of the site still has editorial control over it, but has allowed those who use it to share in the creation and development of content.  This is called "user generated content," and is a hallmark of a new generation of websites--sometimes called the "interactive" web, or the "semantic" web -- or, most often, just Web 2.0.  Let's look at some well-known examples:
+
In the past five years, things have changed quite a bit.  Most leading websites today, in addition to publishing information, allow readers to publish their own responses or comments directly on the site.  Many sites allow users to create their own original content, add images and videos to the site, or vote specific content "up" or "down" in site prominence.  Finally, software advances have made it simple and inexpensive (or free) for users with little or no technical skill to create, publish, and maintain their own websites.  These are the hallmarks of a new generation of websites--sometimes called the "interactive" web, or the "participatory" web.  Most commonly, however, it's simply referred to as "Web 2.0." Let's look at some well-known examples:
 +
 
 +
====E-Bay & Amazon.com====
  
−
====Amazon.com====
 
−
====YouTube====
 
 
====Wikipedia====
 
====Wikipedia====
−
(left out facebook, because they're doing a separate article on social networking -- perhaps we can reference it in passing so people know social networking is web 2.0?)
+
 
 +
====Flickr & YouTube====
 +
 
 +
 
 +
====MySpace & Facebook====
 +
 
  
 
==Highlight why Web 2.0 meshes well with Presbyterian structures.==
 
==Highlight why Web 2.0 meshes well with Presbyterian structures.==

Revision as of 14:01, 10 October 2007

Define Web 2.0 briefly with examples like Facebook, YouTube, WIkipedia.

In the beginning, there was Gutenberg. Those who owned printing presses printed the text, and everyone else merely read it. To be sure, copies of a text might be circulated among friends, discussed around the dinner table, or used to prop up a short table leg -- but the text itself remained static. Any underlined passages or notes in the margin remained isolated from the general public, existing solely in that copy of the text.

The beginning of the internet (what we'll call "Web 1.0) was much the same: Websites were created by a limited few who had the technical or financial resources to do so. The World Wide Web was a great source of information, but not really a means of self-expression or conversation for the masses.

In the past five years, things have changed quite a bit. Most leading websites today, in addition to publishing information, allow readers to publish their own responses or comments directly on the site. Many sites allow users to create their own original content, add images and videos to the site, or vote specific content "up" or "down" in site prominence. Finally, software advances have made it simple and inexpensive (or free) for users with little or no technical skill to create, publish, and maintain their own websites. These are the hallmarks of a new generation of websites--sometimes called the "interactive" web, or the "participatory" web. Most commonly, however, it's simply referred to as "Web 2.0." Let's look at some well-known examples:

E-Bay & Amazon.com

Wikipedia

Flickr & YouTube

MySpace & Facebook

Highlight why Web 2.0 meshes well with Presbyterian structures.

(you're the expert here--I'm still a "noob" Presbyterian!)

Every member a minister = every member an editor/author/contributor

Discern as a community = creating as a community

Allows for minority voices to be heard while the majority still make the decisions

Give a few brief hypothetical/real life examples of Presbyterians using Web 2.0

(we'd have to make sure we aren't repeating something from another article being written).

Top Ten Web 2.0 sites for Churches

  • Google Docs (our church uses this extensively for planning and sharing info)
  • Google Calendar (get your church scheduling syncronized)
  • SourceForge.net (find free/open source software for church use, i.e. OpenOffice.org and music/slide/presentation software)
  • PayPal.com (great for small-church fundraisers)
  • facebook (community building)
  • Wordpress (great choice for maintaining web 2.0 church website)
  • SurveyMonkey (church polls & surveys)
  • Wikia (free wiki hosting service that could be used by church groups)
  • Doodle (website that each member of a group goes to to input and see available times to schedule a meeting)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.mrlocke.net/index.php?title=Web_2.0_Article_for_Presbyterian_Outlook&oldid=1238"