
O’Reilly describes Web 2.0 as having a “gravitational core” about which there are many principles that websites adhere to. The main ideas are that there is strategic positioning in the form of the web as a platform, there is user positioning in the form of data control, and there are various core competencies that many websites follow. Some of these core competencies are services on the net, user participation, scalability, cost-effectiveness, emergent data, multiple platforms, and rich user experiences. In web 2.0, websites follow some or all of these principles. These principles revolutionized the web and marks a difference from Web 1.0 to Web 2.0.

Fuchs writes about how surveillance of data happens in the age of Web 2.0. Since Web 2.0 started, data and information began to be exchanged rapidly on the internet as people shared their data and information amongst each other online and on various social media websites. According to Fuchs, “one important characteristic of many contemporary web platforms is that they store, process, assess, and sell large amounts of personal information and usage behaviour data.” Therefore, the consideration of surveillance in the digital age is important as it has evolved. Positives of Web 2.0 data sharing are the community aspects and collaboration, long-distance updates, and better data collection. However some negatives of Web 2.0 data sharing are the ways that it enables stalking, selling of user information, and discrimination based on user profiles. A key point Fuchs brings up is how corporate internet is largely dominated and controlled by large companies that expropriate, surveil, and exploit users for monetary gain, and we should consider imagining and creating alternatives.

Click the link to view a reflection for the two articles that were summarized above.
oreilly.com | New York: Routledge | Google Logos | IconDuck
I found both of the articles pretty interesting. O’Reilly’s description of Web 2.0 as a gravitational core made sense to me, as websites exist on a spectrum of capabilities and not all of them do the same things. However, Web 2.0 means that these websites follow some similarities in principles and services. The innovation and changes brought about by Web 2.0 is significant. It expanded the internet and brought it to a larger group of people and made things a lot more accessible. However, there are negatives to the advent of Web 2.0, which was the corporatization of the web. This leads into Fuchs’s article about surveillance, where he discusses how corporations manage data in the modern age. While it is useful to give some data in order to receive certain services, it is also hurtful in that companies will use that data to exploit and surveil users for economic benefit. We should definitely be more weary in the age of internet data sharing and how it can be misused by greedy corporations. Fuchs brings up the point that we need to imagine and start creating alternatives to these corporations and I completely agree. This makes me think of open source software and how it is corporation-free and managed by the users. It would be another great turning point when open source is more applicable to web services directly.