Reading # 2

I feel the article is the realization that the internet “buzz” is simply just like every other fad that has come into play. Eventually things in certain genres will die out. For example, the genre of music, every decade or so a new way of buying/listening to music comes out and the old way simply disappears into stories told buy your parents. My parents can’t remember the last time they bought an eight track, I can’t remember the last time I bought a record, and the new generation won’t remember the last time they bought a CD. Wikipedia sky-rocketed and was a very unique idea. With this said, so was instant messaging: which became MySpace, then Facebook, and is now turning into Skype. There is always something better coming but with the unreliability of Wikipedia’s sources and constant editing from anyone this is the first time something on the internet will simply “die.”




I think that the major default that Wikipedia has that other internet dinosaurs have is the lack of personal satisfaction. Unlike MySpace or IMing there are little personal touches. With MySpace and Facebook you place your own individual fingerprint on the internet. Yes other people can message you or put photos of you on your page but they can’t actually change it. With Wikipedia your fingerprint might be altered within the hour of your original posting. It is still your post only with modifications from any and everyone. Also, and possibly most importantly, it is not truly a reliable source of information. Yes there are facts and great information on Wikipedia but you never really know if what you’re reading is factual without further research. I feel if you’re going to have to research the facts you just read then why read those facts at all? This may very well be the first eight track of the world wide web. This could be interesting to see the Wikipedia replacement though, if video killed the radio star then what new concept will kill the Wikipedia star?