I´m not sure what´s the most typical argument here but there are certainly scholars who argue in this direction. For example, Daniela Pscheida who wrote in regard to Wikipedia:
'The acceptance of societally relevant knowledge is no longer determined a priori, one-sidedly and authoritatively, but rather one that is a posteriori negotiated, collaboratively and democratically'
(my translation; please see the article for references and further discussion of this)
Best,
René
On 31.10.2012 19:25, Steven Walling wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:03 AM, René König <kontakt@renekoenig.eu mailto:kontakt@renekoenig.eu> wrote:
Therefore, in this case, lay participation did not lead to a 'democratization' of knowledge production, but rather re-enacted established hierarchies.It feels like you set up a straw man there. I think the typical argument is rather that lay participation in an important cultural artifact is itself the revolutionary characteristic of WIkipedia. Not that amateur authorship leads to some further imagined democratization.
-- Steven Walling https://wikimediafoundation.org/
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l