Price Of Shame

In her call to action, The People’s Platform; Taking Back Power and Culture in the Digital Age, Astra Taylor addresses underlying social and economic forces of the internet and differential perspectives towards it. Taylor discusses the new internet in which content is king and, people are now the product, this is called Web 2.0. She discusses this topic from a couple viewpoints; those who would believe that the internet is truly the new people’s platform and that it is the golden age of sharing and collaboration, called the Techno-optimists. The counterparts of this interpretation of the internet are what she calls the Techno-Skeptics, who have a similar mindset in that of Nicholas Carr, an author about technology in the modern age, with the

In a nut shell the web 2.0 is the way the information is shared, stored, created, displayed, manipulated, and distributed how it effects the internet.

(a) Introduced in 2004 by Tim O’Reilly and Dale Dougherty, Web 2.0 is the second generation of the development of the World Wide Web comparing to its first generation Web 1.0. As a platform of the network, Web 2.0 creates a dynamic web environment that promotes user participation and interaction, information sharing and social networking (O’Reilly 2009). Web 2.0 users are encouraged to better use the resource and create contents. While in the Web 1.0 world, websites are static and the internet users only can read the content and have no opportunity to interact with other users (Cormode and Krishnamurthy 2008). The following characteristics of Web 2.0 make it different from Web 1.0.

Web 2.0 refers to the term given to the second generation World Wide Web, which is majorly focused on giving people the ability to collaborate and share information online. The transition from the old static web pages to the more dynamic and interactive web pages are what are referred to as web 2.0, this websites are well organized and are geared towards delivering of web applications to the users. Web 2.0 brings other improved functionalities like open communication emphasizing on web communities of users and open sharing information with each other. Web 2.0 has become more synonymous as a marketing term. Components of web 2.0 are Wikis, Blogs, Facebook, Twitter, Youtube and Flickr. There have been discussions of Web 2.0 roots been in development communities for open source software, these communities organize and participate in development of software and ideas and suggestions are shared in real time, and the same would apply for Web 2.0. For Web 2.0 it's not just about opening up the code it involves opening up the production of content and exposing data so it can be re-used by all online users ADDIN EN.CITE Shelly20106(Shelly and Frydenberg, 2010)666Shelly, G.B.Frydenberg, M.Web 2.0: Concepts and Applications2010Independence, KYCourse Technology9781439048023http://books.google.co.ke/books?id=WYSP0ll6ftcC( HYPERLINK l "_ENREF_6" o "Shelly, 2010 #6" Shelly and Frydenberg, 2010).

Many early Web pages were static, with no way for users to add to or interact with the information. In some ways, many companies thought of the Internet as an extension of television -- browsers would look passively at whatever content the Web provided. Other companies had different ideas, though. For example, Amazon allowed visitors to create accounts and submit book reviews. Anyone could play the role of a literary critic. Before long, other customers were using these reviews to help them decide what books to buy. Amazon's members were helping to shape the browsing experience. The Web 2.0 philosophy emphasizes the importance of people's interactions with the Internet. Everyone has an opportunity to contribute to the Web. And, by paying attention to what users are looking for and doing online, a company can provide better service and build customer loyalty. Some Web pages absolutely depend upon user contributions -- without them, there'd be no Web site. Wikis are a good example of this. Users can enter information, modify existing data or even delete entire sections in wikis.

This speech is very powerful, it gives a broad description of what is shame. And I totally agree when she says, "Shame is a focus on self, guilt is a focus on behavior." Shame is "I am bad." Guilt is "I did something bad." Many times we do not do things we like for shame , For example, I am a person who likes to sing but I am embarrassed to do it in front of the

such as web 2.0 sites[20], the growing number of internet users, as well as the

WEB 2.0 is a world wide web platform on which a user can access to applications such as blogs, social networking sites.

As readers are reading The Scarlet Letter, “The Price of Public Shame”, and “Is the Internet a Mob without Consequence,” readers will notice that each reading is an element of public shaming. It affects each reading social, professional, and personal life. Public shaming has no benefits, only to the person who did it or posted it and it can destroy someone’s life terribly. Public shaming ruined and killed Tyler Clementi. He went to Rutgers University and because of a terrible choice his roommate made, he jumped off the George Washington Bridge because people saw him being intimate with another man. People choose to bully and make fun of him. Public Shaming caused his death.Therefore, public shaming has negative impacts on a person’s social, professional, and personal life or existence.

The aim of this essay is to mainly critique the viewpoint made by Andrew Keen that “Today’s Internet is Killing Our Culture and Assaulting Our Economy.” First, the brief introduction of Andrew Keen’s book and his viewpoints will be introduced. Second, the Web 2.0 applications such as 1) Wikipedia, 2) Blog, and 3) YouTube will be brought up into the essay and discuss their pros and cons to the Internet environment. Third, Keen’s arguments about these three Web 2.0 applications will be demonstrated. Finally, the conclusion to Keen’s arguments will be concluded.

For an especially more point by point depiction of Web 2.0 ideas, something not excessively specialized, I exceedingly prescribe this article by Tim O'Reilly of O'Reilly Media, Inc.

"Web 2.0" do not have an exact definition. To many individuals, the expression alludes to extraordinary web application innovations and sites, for example, weblogs and wikis, which utilize the Internet cooperatively to give administrations to clients. Web 2.0 depends in vast part on the client as-distributor model of collaboration and takes into consideration client made substance to be created and executed by extensive gatherings of people. These advancements are progressively being utilized by organizations for better staff joint effort and communication.O'Reilly laid out seven rule that can help recognize the center highlights of Web 2.0 applications and number of Web 2.0 administrations and destinations have showed up in the current

Following the dot com crash in 2001, World Wide Web sites started using technology that went beyond the static pages of the earlier web sites. This was described as Web 2.0 [OREI07]. Through a Web 2.0 site, a user may interact and collaborate with other users thus converting it into a social media dialogue. A virtual community may thus be created which is in contrast to the passive viewing of content in the other earlier web sites. Examples of Web 2.0 include social networking sites like Face book and Twitter, professional networking sites like LinkedIn, blogs, wikis, video sharing sites etc.

The internet was originally intended to be an information portal (Discover Kids). It was a way that people could find out information (Discover Kids). People were given the opportunity to find information, but could not comment, provide feedback or post reviews (Discover Kids).This is a one way information tool. Web 2.0 allows web users and sites to interact with each other. Web 2.0 encourages participation, collaboration, and information sharing. This is a two way communication tool. Some examples of Web 2.0 applications are Youtube, Wiki and Facebook (Discover Kids).

In the last several years, a number of new technologies associated with the World Wide Web emerged. The term Web 2.0 is widely used to refer to these technologies that reflect substantial changes in the traditional model of how content for the Web is created and consumed (O'Reilly, 2005). What differentiates these technologies from previous aspects of the Web is the social interaction that is involved, the ability of users to create and disseminate content, the ability of the users to rate and "tag" content, and the free availability to anyone with Internet access (Freedman, 2006). Names of some specific technologies associated with Web 2.0 include flickr™, MySpace©, facebook©, Blogger™, Wikipedia, podcasts, steve.museum, and YouTube™,