Week 2's Readings

 Topic: Participatory Culture & Power

The second module for the ENGL 307 primarily deals with the concept of a "virtual community", as well as the many activities that comprise it. Attention was particularly drawn to the hierarchy of the actions being performed by individuals in online communities, with the illustration above (Rheingold, 2014, pg.120) functioning as a visualization of that concept. As the chart explains, actions like reading and commenting on something has very little power or engagement behind them (aka. instances of "collective intelligence"), while actions such as collaborating, moderating, and leading an online group have far more power and engagement behind them (aka. instances of "collaborative intelligence"). Those on the lower end of the curve (commonly known as "lurkers") are highly common, in contrast to those on the higher end of the curve, who make up a notoriously minor part of the internet, resulting in power/engagement having an indirect relationship with commonness. To offer some anecdotal analogies, my behavior on Facebook and Instagram (in which I barely even read or comment on anything, without my mother demanding that I do so) would be on the lower end of the curve. On the other hand, because I have more autonomy and passion for my Tumblr, my online actions (namely making and leading my own posts, and subsequent online fanbase) are on the further end of the curve. In fact, this very blog is a display of "collaborative intelligence" and subsequent online credibility and authority. Just like the chart suggests, engagement and online power have a direct relationship with each other. 

Because of this, understanding both participatory culture and the power behind it is a crucial aspect of gaining credibility in both the online and analogue world. To quote Howard Rheingold himself, "In the world of digitally networked publics, online participation--if you know how to do it--can translate into real power." (Rheingold, 2014, p.112) When one looks at a general gathering of individuals (whether a job or simply a club/friend group), the general structure is hardly different from an online forum, as Driscoll's "Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing Volume 4" (2022) can attest to. They both are comprised of a group of individuals with a shared goal that involves a specific mode of communication, as well as a specific lexicon and expectations shared by the group. (Driscoll et al., 2022) Because of this, if one wishes to gain both credibility and authority in an online discourse (and thus, subsequently in real life discourse communities), one must keep the power law of participation in mind. By just commenting on a work, one's credibility would already be higher than a good majority of internet users. Thanks to that knowledge, I am started to accomplish more on the internet (such as actually commenting on posts I like, as opposed to simply "reading them", and eventually amassing a semi-famous following on my Tumblr, thanks to performing actions on the higher end of the spectrum), as opposed to my old "lurking" behavior. Where would you say you categorize yourself on Rheingold's chart, in terms of online activity? And does it vary, depending on platform? 

Sources:

Rheingold, H. (2014). Net smart: How to thrive online. MIT Press. Retrieved May 24, 2023, from Rheingold Net Smart full.pdf

Driscoll, D. L., Heise, M., Stewart, M. K., & Vetter, M. (2022). Writing spaces: Readings on writing volume 4 (Vol. 4). PARLOR PRESS. Retrieved May 24, 2021, from Driscoll_writingspaces4.pdf