Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

0.032427073 = product of:
  0.064854145 = sum of:
    0.058123536 = weight(_text_:digitale in 1972) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.058123536 = score(doc=1972,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18027179 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.158747 = idf(docFreq=690, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.3224217 = fieldWeight in 1972, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.158747 = idf(docFreq=690, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1972)
    0.0067306077 = weight(_text_:information in 1972) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0067306077 = score(doc=1972,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.10971737 = fieldWeight in 1972, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1972)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

LCSH

Information society

RSWK

Staatsbürger / Informationsgesellschaft / Internet / Digitale Spaltung / Partizipation / Aufsatzsammlung (SWB)

Subject

Staatsbürger / Informationsgesellschaft / Internet / Digitale Spaltung / Partizipation / Aufsatzsammlung (SWB)
Information society

0.0049327104 = product of:
  0.019730842 = sum of:
    0.019730842 = weight(_text_:information in 438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019730842 = score(doc=438,freq=88.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.32163754 = fieldWeight in 438, product of:
          9.380832 = tf(freq=88.0), with freq of:
            88.0 = termFreq=88.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=438)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

An information view of history -- Organs of the human brain, created by the human hand : toward an understanding of information technology -- Information society or cash nexus? : a study of the United States as a copyright haven -- As sharp as a pen : direct semantic ratification in oral, written, and electronic communication -- In the catalogue ye go for men : evaluation criteria for information retrieval systems -- Meta- and object-language for information retrieval research : proposal for a distinction -- Forms of labor in information systems -- W(h)ither information science?

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST. 56(2003) no.12, S.1360 (C.Tomer): "Humanizing Information Technology is a collection of essays that represent what are presumably Julian Warner's best efforts to understand the perpetually nascent discipline of information science and its relationship to information technology. It is clearly a formidable task. Warner succeeds occasionally in this endeavor; more often, he fails. Yet, it would be wrong to mark Humanizing Information Technology as a book not worth reading. On the contrary, though much fault was found and this review is far from positive, it was nevertheless a book well-worth reading. That Humanizing Information Technology succeeds at all is in some ways remarkable, because Warner's prose tends to be dense and graceless, and understanding his commentaries often relies an close readings of a wide array of sources, some of them familiar, many of them less so. The inaccessibility of Warner's prose is unfortunate; there is not a single idea in Humanizing Information Technology so complicated that it could not have been stated in a clear, straightforward manner. The failure to establish a clear, sufficiently füll context for the more obscure sources is an even more serious problem. Perhaps the most conspicuous example of this problem stems from the frequent examination of the concept of the "information society" and the related notion of information as an autonomous variable, each of them ideas drawn largely from Frank Webster's 1995 book, Theories of the Information Society. Several of Warner's essays contain passages in Humanizing Information Technology whose meaning and value are largely dependent an a familiarity with Webster's work. Yet, Warner never refers to Theories of the Information Society in more than cursory terms and never provides a context füll enough to understand the particular points of reference. Suffice it to say, Humanizing Information Technology is not a book for readers who lack patience or a thorough grounding in modern intellectual history. Warner's philosophical analyses, which frequently exhibit the meter, substance, and purpose of a carefully crafted comprehensive examination, are a large part of what is wrong with Humanizing Information Technology. Warner's successes come when he turns his attention away from Marxist scholasticism and toward historical events and trends. "Information Society or Cash Nexus?" the essay in which Warner compares the role of the United States as a "copyright haven" for most of the 19th century to modern China's similar status, is successful because it relies less an abstruse analysis and more an a sharply drawn comparison of the growth of two economies and parallel developments in the treatment of intellectual property. The essay establishes an illuminating context and cites historical precedents in the American experience suggesting that China's official positions toward intellectual property and related international conventions are likely to evolve and grow more mature as its economy expands and becomes more sophisticated. Similarly, the essay entitled "In the Catalogue Ye Go for Men" is effective because Warner comes dangerously close to pragmatism when he focuses an the possibility that aligning cataloging practice with the "paths and tracks" of discourse and its analysis may be the means by which to build more information systems that furnish a more direct basis for intellectual exploration.
Like Daniel Bell, the author of The Coming of Post-Industrial Society (1973), who used aspects of Marx's thinking as the basis for his social forecasting models, Warner uses Marxist thought as a tool for social and historical analysis. Unlike Bell, Warner's approach to Marx tends to be doctrinaire. As a result, "An Information View of History" and "Origins of the Human Brain," two of the essays in which Warner sets out to establish the connections between information science and information technology, are less successful. Warner argues, "the classic source for an understanding of technology as a human construction is Marx," and that "a Marxian perspective an information technology could be of high marginal Utility," noting additionally that with the exception of Norbert Wiener and John Desmond Bernal, "there has only been a limited penetration of Marxism into information science" (p. 9). But Warner's efforts to persuade the reader that these views are cogent never go beyond academic protocol. Nor does his support for the assertion that the second half of the 19th century was the critical period for innovation and diffusion of modern information technologies. The closing essay, "Whither Information Science?" is particularly disappointing, in part, because the preface and opening chapters of the book promised more than was delivered at the end. Warner asserts that the theoretical framework supporting information science is negligible, and that the discipline is limited even further by the fact that many of its members do not recognize or understand the effects of such a limitation. However cogent the charges may be, none of this is news. But the essay fails most notably because Warner does not have any new directions to offer, save that information scientists should pay closer artention to what is going an in allied disciplines. Moreover, he does not seem to understand that at its heart the "information revolution" is not about the machines, but about the growing legions of men and women who can and do write programming code to exert control over and find new uses for these devices. Nor does he seem to understand that information science, in the grip of what he terms a "quasi-global crisis," suffers grievously because it is a community situated not at the center but rather an the periphery of this revolution."

LCSH

Information science
Information technology / Social aspects
Information society
Information storage and retrieval systems

RSWK

Informationsgesellschaft / Informationstechnik / Information-Retrieval-System / Informationsspeicher

Subject

Informationsgesellschaft / Informationstechnik / Information-Retrieval-System / Informationsspeicher
Information science
Information technology / Social aspects
Information society
Information storage and retrieval systems

0.0019674709 = product of:
  0.007869883 = sum of:
    0.007869883 = weight(_text_:information in 797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007869883 = score(doc=797,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.128289 = fieldWeight in 797, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=797)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Keen's relentless "polemic" is on target about how a sea of amateur content threatens to swamp the most vital information and how blogs often reinforce one's own views rather than expand horizons. But his jeremiad about the death of "our cultural standards and moral values" heads swiftly downhill. Keen became somewhat notorious for a 2006 Weekly Standard essay equating Web 2.0 with Marxism; like Karl Marx, he offers a convincing overall critique but runs into trouble with the details. Readers will nod in recognition at Keen's general arguments - sure, the Web is full of "user-generated nonsense"! - but many will frown at his specific examples, which pretty uniformly miss the point. It's simply not a given, as Keen assumes, that Britannica is superior to Wikipedia, or that record-store clerks offer sounder advice than online friends with similar musical tastes, or that YouTube contains only "one or two blogs or songs or videos with real value." And Keen's fears that genuine talent will go unnourished are overstated: writers penned novels before there were publishers and copyright law; bands recorded songs before they had major-label deals. In its last third, the book runs off the rails completely, blaming Web 2.0 for online poker, child pornography, identity theft and betraying "Judeo-Christian ethics."

Footnote

Andrew Keen is ein englisch-amerikanischer Schriftsteller, Absolvent der Universitäten von London, Berkeley y Sarajevo, Professor an den Universitäten von Tufts, Northeastern und Massachusetts und Gründer des Online-Unternehmens Audiocafe, wer gegenwärtig über die Massenmedien schreibt. Dieses Buch, veröffentlicht in USA in Juni 2007, kursierte schon zwischen den Teilnehmern der Konferenz des TED (Technology Entertainment Design) in Monterrey und es ist eine unerbittliche Kritik des Web 2.0. Ein Artikel in der Weekly Standard ging voraus.. Das Web 2.0 ist nicht so sehr eine Aktualisierung des Internets aus technischer Sicht sondern ein Kolloquialismus, das von O'Reilly Media, ein Internet Kommunikationsunternehmen, während eines der unternehmensinternen Konferenzzyklen geschaffen wurde. Es bezieht sich vor allem auf die Art, in der das Internet benutzt wird. Web 2.0 bezieht sich darüber hinaus auf die Methoden, die die Zusammenarbeit zwischen den Benutzern nachdrücklich betonen und den Besucher oder Kunden einer Seite in Mitverfasser/Co-autor transformieren. Beispiele von Web 2.0 können sein: die Rezensionen in Amazon, die online-offene Enzyklopädie Wikipedia, blogs mit Beteiligung der Leser, Verlage wie blurb.com, welche für jeden Autor die Veröffentlichung seines Buches ermöglichen, u.a. Das Web 2.0 erlaubt einerseits eine größere Interaktivität zwischen Schöpfern und Konsumenten der Kultur- Online, anderseits hat die intellektuelle Piraterie stimuliert. Für den Autor ist es klar, dass genauso wichtig die Mitbestimmung für die politischen Demokratie ist, ist in der Welt der Wissenschaft das, was die Verfechter des Web 2.0 "Diktatur der Experten" nennen. Hundert Wikipedia Mitarbeiter werden nie einen authentischen Techniker, Wissenschaftler oder Historiker ersetzen können. Die Amateurs Blogs können sogar die Texte von Journalisten ersetzen, fehlt es ihnen jedoch die Seriosität dieser. An der einen Seite, stehen die Journalisten, die reisen, befragen, untersuchen, erforschen. An der anderen stehen viel zu oft Leute, die nicht verifizierte Information aus sekundären Quellen entnehmen und veröffentlichen. Es ist nicht nur, dass sie an Seriosität mangeln, sondern auch an Verantwortung. Die anonyme Information kann auch falsch oder fehlerhaft sein, aber ist vor allem verantwortungslose Information, für die, die Verfasser selten zur Verantwortung gezogen werden, egal wie schädlich ihre Ergebnisse sind. Anders geschieht es mit der gedruckten Presse, weil sie rundweg reguliert ist.
Wenn Wikipedia und blogs nur Ergänzungen zur Kultur und zur Information wären, wäre dies nicht gravierend. Das Problem ist, dass sie Ihren Ersatz geworden sind. Darüber hinaus neben der Unerfahrenheit der Autoren steht auch die Anonymität, die ermöglicht, dass sich zwischen den Amateurs Dessinformanten, getarnten Publizisten (vor allem die Spezialisten in Enten und Desinformation, welche jetzt die ganze Welt direkt und glaubhafter erreichen können) zwischen schieben. Fügen wir diesem apokalyptischen Panorama die intellektuelle Piraterie hinzu, werden wir eine Welt haben, in der die Schöpfer von den Nachahmern verdrängt werden. Dies annulliert die Motivation für die Schöpfung des Neuen. Der Autor gibt uns einige Beispiele, wie die Entlassungen bei Disney Productions. Eine große nordamerikanische Fernsehkette hat teuere Serien in Prime Time aus dem Programm entfernt, weil diese nicht mehr rentabel sind. Andere Beispiele u.a. sind die Verluste der traditionellen Presse und das Verschwinden von spezialisierten Platten- und Bücherläden egal wie gut sie waren. Andere Themen: Invasion der Privatsphäre durch das Internet, E-Mail Betrug, wachsende Kinderpornografie, das Plagiat bei Schülern sind auch in dem Buch enthalten. So sollten wir uns ein furchtbares Bild der von den neuen Technologien verursachten Probleme machen. Aber der Kern des Buches besteht in die Verteidigung des individuellen Schöpfertums und des Fachwissens. Beide sind nach Meinung des Autors die Hauptopfer des Web 2.0. Das Buch ist ein Pamphlet, was im Prinzip nicht Schlechtes bedeutet. Marx, Nietzsche, u..v.a. haben auch Pamphlete geschrieben und einige dieser Schriften haben bei der Gestaltung der modernen Welt beigetragen. Das Buch hat alle Merkmale des Pamphlets: ist kurz, kontrovers, aggressiv und einseitig. Daran liegen seine Kräfte und seine Schwäche. Der Text kann in einigen wenigen Stunden gelesen werden und schärft die Wahrnehmung des Leser vor scheinbar unschädlichen Praktiken: runterladen eines Liedes oder die Zusammenstellung einer Schulaufgabe. Weil er einseitig ist, der Autor absichtlich ignoriert, dass viele dieser Probleme unabhängig des Internets existieren, wie das Plagiat. Er unterdrückt auch Tatsachen, wie die Kontrollmechanismen von Wikipedia, die sie genau so vertrauensvoll wie die Encyclopaedia Britannica machen. Aber gerade weil das Buch einseitig ist, hilft der Autor dem Dialog zwischen den unterschiedlichen Formen, um das Internet zu sehen und zu nutzen. (Aus der Originalrezension in Spanisch von Juan Carlos Castillon, Barcelona, en el Blog Penultimos Dias)

LCSH

Information society

Subject

Information society