Rating is available when the video has been rented.
This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.
Published on May 14, 2015
Some slam social media for being unreliable, but recent history shows that the more people who contribute to a body of knowledge, the more reliable it becomes.
In its infancy, we as academics abhorred the superficiality of Wikipedia, but thankfully a number kept an eye on it, and began adding their 10 cents worth.
Today, the people’s 'encyclopaedia' is more reliable than Encyclopaedia Britannica, because structurally, it is a model that self-corrects, and where the best information percolates to the top.
We now admit that the ivory tower is neither the only, nor the best broadcaster of fact. But is the public domain, such as it now stands; not also a better place to carve out policy?
We have needed representatives for many centuries, because we couldn’t physically be present, to acquire or transmit information. 21st century technology reduces that need dramatically, and if you apply the model of Wikipedia, political debates might very well drift in the future, to being decided by the many.
There is certainly evidence in Iceland now, that the future is nigh…