As briefly touched on in an earlier posts (let the citizens speak! and fashion-pedia) the blur between producer and consumer is becoming more pronounced.

In a folksonimically driven space (Web 2.0), persons previously regarded as experts in their field are no longer the only producers of knowledge. Thanks to Citizen Journalism and other produsage based information applications, such as Wikipedia, citizens of all walks-of-life have the ability to publish their knowledge in cyberspace.

Within open participation governed applications according to Axel Bruns ‘expertise’ exists on a sliding vertical scale from recognized leaders to enthusiasts. It also spans across fields, disciplines, and subsets of knowledge. Therefore those who have qualifications in particular fields are not necessarily able to gain immediate respect due to their research and are seen at the same level as citizens who have an interest in the topic. In cases such as Wikipedia which follows an ‘anyone can edit’ structure, (as seen in the previous post) users of the site have the ability to remove previous edits to a page. Therefore if an expert says one thing any user can edit that content to say the complete opposite. The expert with a qualification is not guaranteed the last word. Although experts have no privileged role in open participation applications, Bruns believes that it requires “expertise to understand and accurately evaluate available evidence does, as does the ability to look to those who have that expertise where participants do not possess it themselves”. As experts alienate themselves from the practices of everyday life, they frame problems differently from citizens. Therefore the perspectives of ordinary people should be allowed to transform the knowledge provided by such experts. The community of knowledge creators and curators requires experts on both ends of the scale to make contributions. This enables all to make contributions to the communal process.

Bona fide experts need to regain their status within the internal hierarchy of contributors like all other users of the produsage application. Despite this the question as to who should be allowed such credibility and how shall it be determined remains. Barriers to participation should not come from joining in the form of member ship or paying a fee but should arise from participation within the community itself. The amount and quality of participation should also determine the level of access persons have allowing higher forms of contribution; it should be hard to gain full access. Persons who gain respect through constructive participation must also remember they have a responsibility that their contribution will be constructive and useful to the common aim.

This topic of who is an expert and what content can be trusted has been explored by The Business of Fashion in its blog post “Can fashion bloggers be trusted online authorities?” With the fashion blogsphere forever expanding and more bloggers gaining access to the fashion world it is fair to wonder whether all of this new content actually adding anything new to the reams of content already out there. Millions of people love fashion but does a love of something deam that you are worthy of publishing information and knowledge to the greater fashion network. Does a love for fashion mean u are an expert in fashion. The answer is no but of those fashion bloggers out there how many could truly be defined as experts? How many bloggers love of fashion has turned into an obsession which they studied – if not in an institution – through working in the industry? Everyone is a fashion critique but who’s opinion deserves be broadcasted?

Advertisement