Group 6 reading

Heading into the readings and presentation for group 6, I had no idea that Encyclopedia Brittanica had such a problem with Wikipedia, I always figured that most people had no problems with Wikipedia. I have never thought of it as that valuable of a resource, it's a small stepping stone and is a very amusing website, but I didn't think people actually used it as a resource. It is interesting that a study showed Wikipedia was nearly as accurate as Encyclopedia Brittanica, I guess a marketplace of ideas does sometimes get the right ideas out there.

Group 4 reading

The fact that a ton of big media people read this 21-year-old's blog is an amazing one. That he has built up this much credibility in only two years is something any professional journalist can only dream of. It seems bloggers are given more of the benefit of the doubt, as journalists are held to the highest standards of objectivity and integrity (which they should be), but bloggers get the same respect and do not have to adhere to the same extremely high standards. It's better than journalists' getting complacent, I suppose, so maybe it's not such a bad thing. The only problem is when bloggers are given too much leeway, like in the Rathergate case. People still must realize bloggers may not have the qualifications or credentials to be an expert.

Group 3 reading

I had heard of the DMCA before these readings and presentation, but did not know much about it. I was definitely on the side against the RIAA before the presentation and readings, but afterwards, I can at least see a little bit more where they're coming from. I still think the RIAA goes overboard, but the book publisher associations and MPAA have a little more of a case. The second article we read about fandom made me kind of angry as film and TV executives are ticking off their very fan base. The thing about Universal allowing people to advertise for their movie then telling them to stop a year later is spellbinding. I understand they need to protect their copyright, but these are the people that are lining their pockets.

Group 2 reading

After the readings and the presentation on net neutrality, I'm still not at all sure where I come down on the issue. Both sides make very persuasive arguments, and it's hard to wade through what's actually true and false to see who is distorting the truth a bit, because they're essentially making the same point using different facts. Like one of the presenters said, they were against net neutrality just because that was the part they researched. It was cool to read another Lessig article and see how it compared to Code.