Web 2.0 and Scholarly Communication

["Greg Tananbaum" <gtananbaum@gmail.com>]

As part of a forthcoming two-part column in Against the Grain, I
have been contemplating Web 2.0 and its effect on scholarly
communication. I employ the term "Web 2.0" in reference to the
emerging practices and services that use the Internet as a
platform for communal participation.  To provide further
definition, the Web 2.0 movement involves marked socialization
and collaboration among Internet users. People are sharing
information, data, content, expertise, and opinions in a way that
first generation static web sites could not accommodate.

This sharing often takes the form of rapid peer-to-peer
communication, unvetted by any expert authority.  Britannica
Online is Web 1.0; Wikipedia is Web 2.0.  The former is a
top-down site in which information is disseminated from a team of
experts, to be read by the general public.  The latter is a
grassroots site in which visitors are encouraged to add their own
expertise to evolving definitions.

In considering how Web 2.0 has spilled into the world of
scholarly communication, I was struck by how incongruous its
basic tenets are with many of the fundamental characteristics of
mainstream scholarly publishing.  Today's scholarly journal
circulates one person's work into the hands of many people.  The
one communicates with the many, but true feedback loops through
which the many can communicate back to the one, and to each
other, are rare.  Time and financial constraints can partially
explain this.  However, the fundamental culture of academic
information dissemination is not been particularly geared for
this type of freewheeling exchange.  The tweed jacketed professor
who doles out pearls of wisdom in staid journals is a cliche for
a reason.

Having said all this, there are obviously a number of terrific
examples of Web 2.0 services within the world of scholarly
communication.  The new PLoS One journal
(http://www.plosone.org), for example, with its light editorial
touch, emphasis on the quick dissemination of technically sound
information, and reader rating/commenting layers.  CiteULike
(http://www.citeulike.org/) is another, by allowing professors to
tell the world what they are referencing, or, in essence, what is
on their virtual bookshelves. PictureAustralia
(http://www.pictureaustralia.org/), the photo-sharing
collaboration between the National Library of Australia, its
citizens, and Flickr is another.

What I am wondering is what sites and services list members
perceive as particularly noteworthy in their "2.0-edness".  What
do you see out there that is innovative, not just for novelty's
sake, but in stretching the boundaries of scholarly
communication?

Greg Tananbaum
gtananbaum@gmail.com
(510) 295-7504
-------------------------------------------
CONSULTING SERVICES AT THE INTERSECTION OF TECHNOLOGY, CONTENT, & ACADEMIA