Sociology and, of and in Web 2.0: Some Initial Considerations
社会学以及 Web 2.0 中的社会学：一些初步考虑

by David Beer and Roger Burrows
作者：大卫·比尔和罗杰·布罗斯
University of York; York St John University
约克大学；约克圣约翰大学

Sociological Research Online 12(5)17
社会学研究在线12(5)17
<http://www.socresonline.org.uk/12/5/17.html>
< http://www.socresonline.org.uk/12/5/17.html >
doi:10.5153/sro.1560  doi：10.5153/sro.1560

Received: 14 May 2007     Accepted: 2 Sep 2007    Published: 30 Sep 2007
收稿日期: 2007年5月14日 接受日期: 2007年9月2日 发布日期: 2007年9月30日

---

Abstract  抽象的

This paper introduces the idea of Web 2.0 to a sociological audience as a key example of a process of cultural digitization that is moving faster than our ability to analyse it. It offers a definition, a schematic overview and a typology of the notion as part of a commitment to a renewal of description in sociology. It provides examples of wikis, folksonomies, mashups and social networking sites and, where possible and by way of illustration, examines instances where sociology and sociologists are featured. The paper then identifies three possible agendas for the development of a viable sociology of Web 2.0: the changing relations between the production and consumption of internet content; the mainstreaming of private information posted to the public domain; and, the emergence of a new rhetoric of 'democratisation'. The paper concludes by discussing some of the ways in which we can engage with these new web applications and go about developing sociological understandings of the new online cultures as they become increasingly significant in the mundane routines of everyday life.
本文向社会学受众介绍了 Web 2.0 的概念，作为文化数字化过程的一个关键示例，该过程的发展速度超出了我们的分析能力。它提供了这个概念的定义、概要概述和类型学，作为社会学描述更新承诺的一部分。它提供了维基、民俗分类、混搭和社交网站的示例，并在可能的情况下并通过说明的方式检查了社会学和社会学家的特色实例。然后，本文确定了发展可行的 Web 2.0 社会学的三个可能议程：互联网内容生产和消费之间不断变化的关系；将发布到公共领域的私人信息纳入主流；并且出现了“民主化”的新说法。本文最后讨论了我们可以使用这些新的网络应用程序的一些方式，并随着新的在线文化在日常生活中变得越来越重要而对它们进行社会学理解。

---

Keywords: Sociology of Web 2.0, Sociology of Digitization, Digtization of Sociology, Social Networking Sites, Sociological Description, Online Cultures
关键词： Web 2.0 社会学、数字化社会学、社会学数字化、社交网站、社会学描述、网络文化

---

Introduction  介绍

1.1 By the time you get to read this paper in its published form, even in the hypertextual pages of Sociological Research Online, what it describes may well have become part of the cultural mainstream. (Keen, 2007) It will be mundane. This is a major challenge for sociology in a world where 'internet time' (Wellman and Haythornthwaite, 2002) now runs at a clock speed several orders of magnitude faster than that of academic research. Sociological reactions to this problem of cultural 'speed-up' broadly fit into one or other of two basic strategies (Gane, 2006). On the one hand, some suggest that the discipline needs to match the speed-up of the world by 'going with the flow' and becoming more 'technologized' (Lash, 2002; Lunenfeld, 2000). On the other hand, and seemingly contrary to this, others suggest that in such times of cultural speed-up the discipline should either call for social and cultural slow-down (McLuhan, 1997; Virilio, 1986; 2000), slow down itself (Baudrillard, 2001; 2002), or perhaps even both. Of these two options we would probably err towards the first. We at least want to attempt to go with the flow. We are of the view that the discipline would do well at the present juncture to follow the lead of writers such as Pickstone (2002), Latour (2005) and Lash and Lury (2007) and embrace a renewed interest in sociological description (Savage and Burrows, 2007) as applied to new cultural digitizations. This means that it is necessary for us to 'technologize' ourselves rather more than has hitherto been the case. At a time of rapid socio-cultural change a renewed emphasis on good � critical, distinctive and thick � sociological descriptions of emergent digital phenomena, ahead of any headlong rush into analytics, seems to us to be a sensible idea. We need to understand some of the basic parameters of our new digital objects of sociological study before we can satisfactorily locate them within any broader frames of theoretical reference.
1.1当你读到这篇论文的出版形式时，即使是在社会学研究在线的超文本页面上，它所描述的内容很可能已经成为文化主流的一部分。 （ Keen，2007 ）这将是平凡的。在当今“互联网时间”（ Wellman and Haythornthwaite，2002 ）的时钟速度比学术研究快几个数量级的世界中，这是社会学面临的重大挑战。对文化“加速”问题的社会学反应大致符合两种基本策略中的一种或另一种（ Gane，2006 ）。一方面，一些人认为该学科需要通过“随波逐流”并变得更加“技术化”来适应世界的加速发展（ Lash，2002 ； Lunenfeld，2000 ）。另一方面，似乎与此相反，其他人认为，在文化加速的时代，学科应该要么要求社会和文化放慢速度（ McLuhan，1997 ； Virilio，1986 ； 2000 ），要么放慢自身速度（ Baudrillard，2001 ； 2002 ），或者两者都有。在这两个选项中，我们可能会错误地选择第一个。我们至少想尝试顺其自然。我们认为，该学科在目前阶段会很好地跟随皮克斯顿（Pickstone， 2002 ）、拉图尔（Latour， 2005 ）以及拉什和卢里（Lash and Lury， 2007 ）等作家的领导，并拥抱对社会学描述的新兴趣（ Savage和Burrows，2007 ）应用于新的文化数字化。这意味着我们有必要比以往更多地“技术化”自己。 在社会文化快速变革的时代，在急于进行分析之前，重新强调对新兴数字现象进行良好的、批判性的、独特的和厚重的社会学描述，对我们来说似乎是一个明智的想法。我们需要了解社会学研究的新数字对象的一些基本参数，然后才能在更广泛的理论参考框架中令人满意地定位它们。

1.2 Our concern here is with a cluster of contemporary networked technologies which, popular rhetoric suggests, are reworking hierarchies, changing social divisions, creating possibilities and opportunities, informing us, and reconfiguring our relations with objects, spaces and each other. If this is indeed the case then they obviously have a huge sociological significance. However, they are also technologies that have very quickly become incorporated within the mundane realities of everyday life (especially for many young people) and, as such, are in danger of quickly sinking from sociological view unless we remain alert to their broader significance (Wellman and Haythornthwaite, 2002).
1.2我们在这里关注的是一系列当代网络技术，流行的言论表明，这些技术正在重塑等级制度，改变社会分化，创造可能性和机会，为我们提供信息，并重新配置我们与物体、空间和彼此之间的关系。如果情况确实如此，那么它们显然具有巨大的社会学意义。然而，它们也是很快融入日常生活（尤其是对于许多年轻人）的平凡现实的技术，因此，除非我们对它们更广泛的意义保持警惕，否则它们面临着迅速从社会学角度消失的危险（威尔曼和海索恩斯韦特，2002 ）。

1.3 Our focus here is on some significant developments in internet culture which have emerged in the last two years or so, but which have so far received little in the way of any sustained sociological investigation. We are interested in trying to ascertain what sociological agendas are relevant to understanding the large scale shift toward user-generated web content � a movement defined by the related practices of (to use the argot of the field) 'generating' and 'browsing', 'tagging' and 'feeds', 'commenting' and 'noting', 'reviewing' and 'rating', 'mashing-up' and making 'friends'. Our concern is to produce some introductory notes for the general sociological reader towards the development of a sociology of (what has come to be known as) Web 2.0 � a supposedly second upgraded version of the web that is more open, collaborative, and participatory (O'Reilly, 2005). Here we use this term � Web 2.0 � simply as an initial sensitising concept, albeit one that we recognise is already contaminated by the rhetorical strategies of web designers, the sales patter of commercial futurists, and the new cultures discourse of the popular media. We use the term simply as a device to refer to a cluster of new applications and related online cultures that possess a conceptual unity only to the extent that it is possible to decipher some significant socio-technical characteristics that they have in common. The Web 2.0 we begin to characterise and describe here is complex, ambivalent, dynamic, laden with tensions and subversions, and, we would argue, of increasing sociological significance.
1.3我们这里的重点是过去两年左右出现的网络文化的一些重大发展，但迄今为止几乎没有受到任何持续的社会学调查的影响。我们有兴趣尝试确定哪些社会学议程与理解向用户生成的网络内容的大规模转变相关——这一运动由（使用该领域的行话）“生成”和“浏览”的相关实践定义， “标记”和“提要”、“评论”和“注释”、“评论”和“评级”、“混搭”和交“朋友”。我们的关注点是为一般社会学读者提供一些关于 Web 2.0 社会学发展的介绍性说明（后来被称为Web 2.0 ）——据称是网络的第二个升级版本，更加开放、协作和参与（奥莱利，2005 ）。在这里，我们使用“Web 2.0”这个术语只是作为一个最初的敏感概念，尽管我们认识到这个概念已经受到网页设计师的修辞策略、商业未来主义者的销售模式以及流行媒体的新文化话语的污染。我们仅使用该术语作为一种手段来指代一组新应用程序和相关的在线文化，这些应用程序和相关的在线文化仅在可以破译它们所具有的一些共同的重要社会技术特征的范围内才具有概念统一性。我们在这里开始表征和描述的 Web 2.0 是复杂的、矛盾的、动态的、充满张力和颠覆的，而且我们认为，它具有越来越大的社会学意义。

1.4 The paper is divided into three sections. The first describes Web 2.0 and draws on examples from sociology to introduce and illustrate the applications that are covered; we call this simply sociology and Web 2.0. The second section then moves toward how we might begin to think sociologically about these Web 2.0 applications. We continue to use examples from sociology but the aim of this section is to begin to sketch out a possible sociology of Web 2.0. We then conclude with a discussion of the various ways that we might be able to engage sociologically with these new web applications, how we might get inside these web cultures and use them for sociological purposes (conducting research, finding things out, teaching, and so on). This final section may then be thought of as a brief discussion of sociology in Web 2.0.
1.4本文分为三部分。第一部分描述了 Web 2.0，并利用社会学的例子来介绍和说明所涵盖的应用程序；我们简称为社会学和 Web 2.0 。第二部分接着讨论我们如何开始从社会学角度思考这些 Web 2.0 应用程序。我们继续使用社会学的例子，但本节的目的是开始勾勒出Web 2.0 可能的社会学。然后，我们最后讨论了我们可能能够从社会学角度参与这些新网络应用程序的各种方式，我们如何进入这些网络文化并将其用于社会学目的（进行研究、发现问题、教学等）在）。最后一部分可以被认为是对Web 2.0 中的社会学的简要讨论。

Sociology and Web 2.0  社会学和Web 2.0

2.1 We see through a range of already very well know websites, such as http://www.wikipedia.organd http://www.myspace.com, that networks are taking shared responsibility for the construction of vast accumulations of knowledge about themselves, each other, and the world. These are dynamic matrices of information through which people observe others, expand the network, make new 'friends', edit and update content, blog, remix, post, respond, share files, exhibit, tag and so on. This has been described as an online 'participatory culture' (Jenkins et al., 2006) where users are increasingly involved in creating web content as well as consuming it.
2.1我们通过一系列已经非常知名的网站（例如http://www.wikipedia.org和http://www.myspace.com ）看到，网络正在共同承担构建有关以下内容的大量知识积累的责任：自己、彼此、世界。这些是动态的信息矩阵，人们通过它们观察他人、扩展网络、结交新“朋友”、编辑和更新内容、博客、混音、发布、回复、共享文件、展览、标签等。这被描述为一种在线“参与文化”（ Jenkins等，2006 ），其中用户越来越多地参与创建和消费网络内容。

2.2 Thus far there has been little systematic research into the activities that are generating this new web content or, indeed, who it is that is involved. However, what has already become clear is that a more active and participatory role is being taken by web users in these developments. Indeed, research from the Pew Internet & American Life project reported as far back as 2005 (a long while ago in 'Internet time') found that 'more than half of all teens who go online create content for the internet' (Lenhardt and Madden, 2005: 8). This is sure to have escalated with the significant rise of content generated Web 2.0 applications and particularly social networking sites (SNS) such as MySpace in the interim. Perhaps the most common user-generated content prior to this explosion was the personal blog or weblog. Blogs are run as spaces where individuals, or groups, write for an online audience. These are often described as online diaries that users frequently update. The types of entries made vary quite considerably and are not always limited to the type of entries that you might expect to see in a diary. So for instance we find sociologists operating sociologically informed blogs where they discuss their work, academic conferences, recent publications, contemporary debates in the discipline and so on. Examples of this include http://www.purselipsquarejaw.org, a blog run by Anne Galloway to communicate her research and activities, and http://www.homecookedtheory.com, a blog run by Melissa Gregg as part of her academic research into blogging. We find now that sociological research on Web 2.0 is being developed through blogging see for instance Maz Hardey's blog at http://properfacebooketiquette.blogspot.com/. Also notable here is the blog http://www.spaceandculture.org that runs alongside the publication of the print journal of the same name. A further note should also be made of the recent foray of the British Sociological Association (BSA) into the world of blogging with their blog accompanying the 2007 Annual conference, http://www.bsaconf.blogspot.com/. In more general terms the importance of blogging is that it became an established practice for creating user generated content and shifted the emphasis in web cultures away from more static toward dynamic content and toward user engagement (we see for instance the importance of the comments made by visitors in response to posts on blogs).
2.2迄今为止，对于生成这种新网络内容的活动，或者实际上是谁参与其中，还没有进行系统的研究。然而，已经显而易见的是，网络用户在这些发展中正在发挥更加积极和参与的作用。事实上，皮尤互联网与美国生活项目的研究报告早在 2005 年（很久以前的“互联网时代”）就发现“超过一半的上网青少年为互联网创建内容”（ Lenhardt 和 Madden） ，2005 ：8）。随着内容生成的 Web 2.0 应用程序，特别是在此期间的 MySpace 等社交网站 (SNS) 的显着增长，这种情况肯定会升级。也许在这次爆炸之前最常见的用户生成内容是个人博客或网络博客。博客是个人或团体为在线受众写作的空间。这些通常被描述为用户经常更新的在线日记。所做的条目类型差异很大，并且并不总是限于您可能期望在日记中看到的条目类型。例如，我们发现社会学家经营社会学知识博客，他们在其中讨论他们的工作、学术会议、最近的出版物、该学科的当代辩论等等。这方面的例子包括http://www.purselipsquarejaw.org ，一个由 Anne Galloway 运行的博客，用于交流她的研究和活动，以及http://www.homecookedtheory.com ，一个由 Melissa Gregg 运行的博客，作为她学术研究的一部分进入博客。我们现在发现 Web 2 上的社会学研究。0 是通过博客开发的，例如，请参阅 Maz Hardey 的博客，网址为http://properfacebooketiquette.blogspot.com/ 。这里还值得注意的是博客http://www.spaceandculture.org ，该博客与同名印刷期刊一起出版。还应该进一步注意的是英国社会学协会 (BSA) 最近进军博客领域，他们的博客伴随着 2007 年年会， http://www.bsaconf.blogspot.com/ 。更一般地说，博客的重要性在于，它成为创建用户生成内容的既定做法，并将网络文化的重点从静态内容转向动态内容和用户参与（例如，我们看到访客回复博客上的帖子）。

2.3 Blogging has continued as a common practice in internet cultures, but over the last two to three years we have seen the emergence of other user-generated web applications. Indeed, these Web 2.0 applications have now become some of the most visited sites on the web with MySpace alone reportedly receiving 'more "hits" per day than the now ubiquitous Google' (Robinson, 2006: 20). Web 2.0 applications then have become an embedded and routine part of contemporary everyday life, particularly for young people (Lenhardt and Madden, 2005) but, even before sociologists have begun to get a handle on the phenomena, the processes of cultural speed-up (Gane, 2006) that we noted above have begun to come into play; it has recently been reported, for instance, that following the rapid rise of MySpace during 2006 it is now considered 'so last year' by its predominately 'teen' audience (Noguchi, 2006; Sessums, 2006).
2.3博客仍然是互联网文化中的一种常见做法，但在过去的两到三年里，我们看到了其他用户生成的网络应用程序的出现。事实上，这些 Web 2.0 应用程序现已成为网络上访问量最大的网站之一，据报道，仅 MySpace 每天的“点击量”就比现在无处不在的 Google 还要多（ Robinson，2006 ：20）。 Web 2.0 应用程序已成为当代日常生活中嵌入和常规的一部分，特别是对于年轻人而言（ Lenhardt 和 Madden，2005 ），但是，即使在社会学家开始处理这种现象之前，文化加速的过程（ Gane, 2006 ）我们上面提到的已经开始发挥作用；例如，最近有报道称，随着 MySpace 在 2006 年迅速崛起，现在它被主要是“青少年”的受众视为“去年”（ Noguchi，2006 年； Sessums，2006 年）。

2.4 To open up this definition of Web 2.0 a little further we can adopt a recursive strategy by turning (as do many of our students of course) to the online encyclopaedia Wikipedia, which is a paradigmatic instance of a collaboratively produced Web 2.0 application. Here, at the time of writing, Web 2.0 is described as:
2.4为了进一步阐明 Web 2.0 的定义，我们可以采用递归策略（当然，我们的许多学生也这样做）到在线百科全书Wikipedia ，它是协作生成的 Web 2.0 应用程序的典型实例。在撰写本文时，Web 2.0 被描述为：

'a phrase coined by O'Reilly Media in 2004 [to refer to] a supposed second generation of internet based services � such as social networking sites, wikis, communication tools, and folksonomies � that emphasize online collaboration and sharing among users. O'Reilly Media, in collaboration with Media Live International, used the phrase as a title for a series of conferences and since 2004 it has become a popular (though ill-defined and often criticized) buzzword among certain technical and marketing communities.' (Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2)
“O'Reilly Media 在 2004 年创造的一个短语[指]所谓的第二代基于互联网的服务——例如社交网站、维基、通信工具和大众分类法——强调用户之间的在线协作和共享。 O'Reilly Media 与 Media Live International 合作，使用该短语作为一系列会议的标题，自 2004 年以来，它已成为某些技术和营销社区中的流行语（尽管定义不明确且经常受到批评）。 （维基百科， http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2 ）

2.5 Wikipedia is perhaps the leading example of how this type of open and collaborative practice operates to create an online repository of ideas and knowledge formed into a dynamic document that changes from day-to-day. Here users are involved as producers and consumers of the information, both browsing for and adding content to the project (although, of course, some users merely browse without contribution).
2.5维基百科也许是这种类型的开放和协作实践如何运作以创建思想和知识的在线存储库并形成每天变化的动态文档的主要例子。在这里，用户作为信息的生产者和消费者参与进来，既浏览项目又向项目添加内容（当然，有些用户只是浏览而不贡献）。

2.6 A second key feature of Web 2.0 is the operation of software 'above the level of a single device' (O'Reilly, 2005). The point here is that in place of information storage on any single device Web 2.0 applications make information accessible through any web enabled interface. Here information moves from the private device out into the network allowing for it to be accessed from a range of mobile and desktop interfaces at anytime and from anywhere. This represents an instance where the 'technology itself � in terms of both applications and operating software � moves from the desktop to the webtop' (Lash, 2006: 580). For Lash this has created an 'age of the portal' where 'the data find you' (Lash, 2006: 580). This is highlighted as we are frequently confronted with recommendations, news specific to our interests or about our friends, suggested purchases and other things of supposed interest. These 'knowing' (Thrift, 2005) systems anticipate, through strategic data mining and classification, and search us out rather than the reverse.
2.6 Web 2.0 的第二个关键特征是“高于单个设备级别”的软件操作（ O'Reilly，2005 ）。这里的要点是，Web 2.0 应用程序可以通过任何支持 Web 的界面访问信息，从而取代任何单个设备上的信息存储。在这里，信息从私人设备转移到网络中，从而可以随时随地通过各种移动和桌面界面进行访问。这代表了“技术本身——就应用程序和操作软件而言——从桌面转移到网络顶部”的实例（ Lash，2006 ：580）。对于 Lash 来说，这创造了一个“门户时代”，“数据找到你”（ Lash，2006 ：580）。当我们经常遇到针对我们的兴趣或关于我们的朋友的推荐、新闻、建议的购买和其他假定感兴趣的事物时，这一点就显得尤为突出。这些“了解”（ Thrift，2005 ）系统通过战略数据挖掘和分类来预测并搜索我们，而不是相反。

2.7 The rise of Web 2.0 has been genealogically connected with the type of business that survived the 'bursting of the dot-com bubble in the fall of 2001' (O'Reilly, 2005); that is to say that it is sites with Web 2.0 characteristics - those closest to the participatory model - that are now flourishing (O'Reilly, 2005; Maness, 2006). Use of the term is also becoming ubiquitous. A search for 'Web 2.0' on Google, for example, retrieved 'about 124,000,000 results' at the time of writing, and entering it into the still experimental Google Trends (http://www.google.com/trends) revealed a significant escalation in recorded searches from mid-2005 onward (with by far the most searches originating in the USA and South East Asia).
2.7 Web 2.0 的兴起与“2001 年秋季网络泡沫破裂”中幸存下来的企业类型有着血统关系（ O'Reilly，2005 ）；也就是说，具有 Web 2.0 特征的网站（最接近参与式模型的网站）现在正在蓬勃发展（ O'Reilly，2005 ； Maness，2006 ）。该术语的使用也变得无处不在。例如，在撰写本文时，在 Google 上搜索“Web 2.0”，检索到“约 124,000,000 个结果”，并将其输入仍处于试验阶段的 Google Trends ( http://www.google.com/trends ) 中，结果显示了一个重要的结果。从 2005 年中期开始，记录的搜索量不断增加（迄今为止，大多数搜索来自美国和东南亚）。

2.8 Understandably, ongoing debates continue over exactly what is meant by Web 2.0. As O'Reilly points out, there are those 'decrying it as a meaningless marketing buzzword, and others accepting it as the new conventional wisdom' (O'Reilly, 2005: 1). However, in lieu of a more descriptive and historical account of Web 2.0, the technical details of which this paper is not concerned, the basic features of Web 2.0 outlined can be schematised, as in Figure 1 (which is a slightly amended version of one originally developed by Michael Hardey of the Hull York Medical School, which itself was inspired by O'Reilly (2005)), and provides us with a useful sensitising conceptual mapping of our topic of inquiry.
2.8可以理解的是，关于 Web 2.0 的确切含义的争论仍在继续。正如 O'Reilly 指出的，有些人“谴责它是毫无意义的营销流行语，而另一些人则接受它作为新的传统智慧”（ O'Reilly，2005 ：1）。然而，为了代替对 Web 2.0 的更具描述性和历史性的描述（本文不关心其技术细节），可以对 Web 2.0 概述的基本特征进行系统化，如图1所示（这是一个稍微修改的版本）最初由赫尔约克医学院的 Michael Hardey 开发，其本身受到 O'Reilly ( 2005 ) 的启发，为我们的探究主题提供了有用的敏感概念图。

2.9 To further develop this we will focus on four types of Web 2.0 application around which our discussion can be organised: wikis, folksonomies, mashups and, most significantly we sense, social networking sites (SNS).
2.9为了进一步发展这一点，我们将重点关注四种类型的 Web 2.0 应用程序，我们的讨论可以围绕这些应用程序进行： wiki 、大众分类法、混搭以及我们认为最重要的社交网站(SNS)。

Wikis  维基百科

2.10 Wikis can be understood as user-generated resources constructed and edited by anyone who wishes to contribute, the most well-known example of which, as we have already discussed, is the online encyclopaedia Wikipedia. Other examples of wikis include http://www.encyclopedia.com, http://www.martindalecenter.com, and http://www.onelook.com. The pages generated on these Wikis are linked together by a network of live hyperlinks in the text that allow users to skip through to related pages. The term Wiki is an abbreviation of "Wiki Wiki" meaning "quick" in Hawaiian and has been in use for describing this phenomenon of open collaboration for around 10 years.
2.10 Wiki 可以理解为由任何希望贡献的人构建和编辑的用户生成资源，其中最著名的例子，正如我们已经讨论过的，是在线百科全书维基百科。 wiki 的其他示例包括http://www.encyclopedia.com 、 http://www.martindalecenter.com和http://www.onelook.com 。这些 Wiki 上生成的页面通过文本中的实时超链接网络链接在一起，允许用户跳到相关页面。 Wiki 一词是“Wiki Wiki”的缩写，在夏威夷语中意为“快速”，用于描述这种开放协作现象已有大约 10 年的历史。

2.11 The first Wiki was created by Ward Cunningham, a software designer from Portland in Washington, who wanted to have a simple database system that would allow him to easily exchange design patterns with his international contacts and for the design team to work collaboratively from different geographical locations (Korica et al., 2006: 2). This type of 'software�enables every user to easily change the content of a page by clicking on an "Edit Page" button' (Korica et al., 2006: 2). It is this edit facility, open to anyone, that is the key feature of wikis. The second key feature is the 'sophisticated version control which enables users to see recent changes and the history of the changes of a Web page' (Korica et al., 2006: 2). This function allows users to make and track changes in the editing processes, correcting 'mistakes' and tracking additions that are 'inaccurate' or out of date.
2.11第一个 Wiki 是由来自华盛顿波特兰的软件设计师 Ward Cunningham 创建的，他希望拥有一个简单的数据库系统，使他能够轻松地与国际联系人交换设计模式，并使设计团队能够在不同地域进行协作位置（ Korica等，2006 ：2）。这种类型的“软件使每个用户都可以通过单击“编辑页面”按钮轻松更改页面内容”（ Korica等人，2006 年：2）。正是这种向任何人开放的编辑功能才是 wiki 的关键特征。第二个关键功能是“复杂的版本控制，使用户能够查看网页的最近更改和更改历史记录”（ Korica等，2006 ：2）。该功能允许用户在编辑过程中进行并跟踪更改，纠正“错误”并跟踪“不准确”或过时的添加内容。

2.12 In short, wikis can simply be described as 'open web-pages, where anyone registered with the wiki can publish to it, amend it, change it' (Maness, 2006: 6). This, of course, generates a range of questions about the reliability and authority of information. The open editing means that these sites are open to vandalism and subversive actions as well as questions about accuracy, sources of information, standards, and the possibility of mistakes.
2.12简而言之，维基可以简单地描述为“开放网页，任何在维基上注册的人都可以在其中发布、修改、更改”（ Maness，2006 ：6）。当然，这会产生一系列有关信息可靠性和权威性的问题。开放编辑意味着这些网站容易遭到破坏和颠覆行为，也会受到有关准确性、信息来源、标准和错误可能性的质疑。

2.13 An interesting sociological example of this can be found in the wikipedia entry on Harvey Sacks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Sacks), who is often credited with founding conversation analysis. The neutrality of the entry is disputed and clicking through on the 'talk page' page and the 'history' tab reveals a quite amazing set of ongoing claims, counter-claims, edits and re-edits. Here we see that these collaborative ventures track the dialectics of thought on Sacks as users dispute the entries and interpretations of other users. The text of the Wiki then becomes a product of the tensions in the discipline and an outcome of disputed territory. Rather than the fixed authoritative accounts of the printed word, these are dynamic entries that tell us not only about the searched term but also about the turbulent underpinnings of 'collective intelligence' (O'Reilly, 2005). It will be interesting to see how sociology � and other disciplines of course � respond to this. A fascinating example will be to track how the ambitious Theory, Culture and Society New Encyclopaedia Project (http://www.sagepub.net/tcs/bin/main.aspx?page=encyclopedia) develops.
2.13一个有趣的社会学例子可以在关于 Harvey Sacks 的维基百科条目 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Sacks ) 中找到，他经常被认为是对话分析的奠基人。该条目的中立性存在争议，点击“讨论页”页面和“历史记录”选项卡会显示一组相当惊人的正在进行的主张、反主张、编辑和重新编辑。在这里我们看到，当用户对其他用户的条目和解释提出争议时，这些合作企业跟踪了 Sacks 的思想辩证法。维基百科的文本就成为学科紧张局势的产物和有争议的领土的结果。这些动态条目不是印刷文字的固定权威描述，它们不仅告诉我们搜索到的术语，还告诉我们“集体智慧”的动荡基础（ O'Reilly，2005 ）。看看社会学——当然还有其他学科——对此有何反应将会很有趣。一个有趣的例子是跟踪雄心勃勃的理论、文化和社会新百科全书项目 ( http://www.sagepub.net/tcs/bin/main.aspx?page=encyclopedia ) 的发展情况。

Folksonomies  民间分类法

2.14 One of the key practices behind Web 2.0 is tagging, this involves locating and marking or classifying a webpage with a metadata label. Tagging 'enables users to create subject headings for the object at hand�[and]�to add and change not only content (data), but content describing content (metadata)' (Maness, 2006: 8). Tags act as metadata operating behind web pages enabling them to be organised into classified networks. The result is that tagging makes 'lateral searching easier' (Maness, 2006: 8). We can move in non-linear directions from one page onto pages that have something in common, or, when finding similar pages tag them to enable other users to make the same connections.
2.14 Web 2.0 背后的关键实践之一是标记，这涉及使用元数据标签来定位和标记或分类网页。标签“使用户能够为手头的对象创建主题标题……不仅可以添加和更改内容（数据），还可以添加和更改描述内容的内容（元数据）”（ Maness，2006 ：8）。标签充当网页背后运行的元数据，使它们能够被组织成分类网络。结果是标记使“横向搜索更容易”（ Maness，2006 ：8）。我们可以以非线性方向从一个页面移动到具有共同点的页面，或者在找到相似的页面时标记它们以使其他用户能够建立相同的连接。

2.15 Two of the most widely used folksonomies are del.icio.us.com and flickr.com. Del.icio.us enables users to keep their bookmarked pages together and to look through other users' bookmarks to create new sets of tagged links. So, for example, searching for sociology on Del.icio.us finds 18,500 bookmarked and tagged pages to browse through. Flickr is a photo repository that allows the user to store, search, sort and share pictures. Searching Flickr for the name of the college in which the authors wrote the majority of this article for instance finds a handful of photos of the building. Using the broader search terms of 'sociology lecture' 18 photos are found of sociology lectures including a link to a series of pictures of Zygmunt Bauman delivering a lecture at V�xj� University in Sweden.
2.15最广泛使用的两个大众分类法是 del.icio.us.com 和 flickr.com。 Del.icio.us 使用户能够将其添加书签的页面保存在一起，并浏览其他用户的书签以创建新的标记链接集。例如，在 Del.icio.us 上搜索社会学会发现 18,500 个带有书签和标签的页面可供浏览。 Flickr 是一个照片存储库，允许用户存储、搜索、排序和共享图片。例如，在 Flickr 中搜索作者撰写本文大部分内容的学院名称，会发现一些该建筑的照片。使用“社会学讲座”这一更广泛的搜索词，可以找到 18 张社会学讲座照片，其中包括齐格蒙特·鲍曼 (Zygmunt Bauman) 在瑞典 V�xj� 大学演讲的一系列照片的链接。

2.16 Finally, the most well known and highly used folksonomy is the online video repository http://www.youtube.com. YouTube now hosts over 100 million video downloads per day and it has even been suggested that this may offer a viable alternative to mainstream cinema or television (Bradshaw, 2006). By way of example, in March 2007 almost 500 videos had been tagged as 'sociology' � one, a 4-minute interview with Michael Mann, Professor of Sociology at UCLA (who we will meet again later on), was also tagged with 'Michel' (sic), 'Mann', 'social', 'power', ' world' and 'history'. The others included student's sociology projects or clips of students performing various 'stunts' in sociology classes. A notable example of a sociology video on Youtube is the paradoy of sociology at the University of Chicago which can be found at http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=PohmxAOlN5Q&mode=related&search=
2.16最后，最知名和最常用的大众分类法是在线视频存储库http://www.youtube.com 。 YouTube 现在每天的视频下载量超过 1 亿次，甚至有人建议这可能为主流电影或电视提供可行的替代方案（ Bradshaw，2006 ）。举例来说，2007 年 3 月，近 500 个视频被标记为“社会学”，其中一个是对加州大学洛杉矶分校社会学教授迈克尔·曼 (Michael Mann) 的 4 分钟采访（我们稍后会再次见到他），也被标记为“社会学”。米歇尔”（原文如此）、“曼”、“社会”、“权力”、“世界”和“历史”。其他内容包括学生的社会学项目或学生在社会学课堂上表演各种“特技”的片段。 YouTube 上社会学视频的一个著名例子是芝加哥大学社会学的悖论，可以在http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=PohmxAOlN5Q&mode=related&search=找到。

Mashups   混搭

2.17 Mashups are 'hybrid applications, where two or more technologies or services are conflated into a completely new, novel, service' (Maness, 2006: 9). The term has been appropriated from pop music where a DJ takes, for example, a vocal track from one song and combines it with the instrumental track of another to produce something new. Many Web 2.0 applications are, in fact, mashups of various sorts (Maness, 2006: 9). Mashups are used to create various applications, although they 'often (but not always) have a mapping component' (Lerner, 2006: 1). One infamous example not based on maps is Gizoogle ( http://www.gizoogle.com), which converts webpages into politically incorrect Snoop Dogg style discourse.
2.17混搭是“混合应用程序，其中两种或多种技术或服务被合并成一种全新的、新颖的服务”（ Maness，2006 ：9）。该术语源自流行音乐，例如，DJ 将一首歌曲中的声乐曲目与另一首歌曲的器乐曲目相结合以产生新的东西。事实上，许多 Web 2.0 应用程序都是各种类型的混搭（ Maness，2006 ：9）。混搭用于创建各种应用程序，尽管它们“通常（但并非总是）具有映射组件”（ Lerner，2006 ：1）。一个不基于地图的臭名昭著的例子是Gizoogle ( http://www.gizoogle.com )，它将网页转换为政治上不正确的 Snoop Dogg 风格的话语。

2.18 The point of mashups is that they present existing information in new ways. In the case of mashed-up maps, this enables patterns to emerge in the data. This means that as information about crime rates, for example, become mashed up with google maps, the user can see instantly groupings of crimes. Take for instance this account of an encounter with a mashup taken from the open source software focused Linux Journal:
2.18混搭的要点在于它们以新的方式呈现现有信息。对于混合地图，这使得模式能够在数据中出现。这意味着，例如，当有关犯罪率的信息与谷歌地图混合在一起时，用户可以立即看到犯罪分组。以开源软件Linux Journal中有关混搭的经历为例：

'One of the first Mashups I saw was the Chicago crime map. The Chicago Police Department publishes a regular bulletin of crimes that have taken place within the city, and their approximate location�I was living in Chicago at the time it came out, and (of course) used the listing to find out just how safe my neighbourhood was. The information always had been available from the police department, but it was only in the context of a mapping application that I was really able to understand and internalize this data' (Lerner, 2006: 1).
“我看到的第一个混搭是芝加哥犯罪地图。芝加哥警察局定期发布该市内发生的犯罪事件及其大致位置的公告。该公告发布时我住在芝加哥，（当然）使用该列表来了解我的安全情况邻里是。这些信息始终可以从警察部门获得，但只有在地图应用程序的背景下，我才真正能够理解和内化这些数据”（ Lerner，2006 ：1）。

2.19 A history and inventory of mashups are available at http://www.mashups.com and further discussion of some of the possible sociological implications of mapping mashups � especially for the possibility of the emergence of a new public culture of social research - can be found in Hardey and Burrows (2008).
2.19混搭的历史和清单可在http://www.mashups.com上找到，并进一步讨论映射混搭的一些可能的社会学影响——特别是对于社会研究的新公共文化出现的可能性——可以可以在 Hardey 和 Burrows ( 2008 ) 中找到。

Social Networking Sites   社交网站

2.20 Social networking sites (SNS) are perhaps the most socially significant of the Web 2.0 applications, particularly as the number of users continues to escalate and as they converge a range of other Web 2.0 phenomena (see for example the map-mashup SNS site http://www.mymapspace.com). MySpace already has over 130 million members (a 'population' already over twice that of the UK) and Facebook around 18 million.
2.20社交网站 (SNS) 可能是 Web 2.0 应用中最具社会意义的应用，特别是随着用户数量不断增加以及它们融合了一系列其他 Web 2.0 现象（例如，参见地图混搭 SNS 网站http ://www.mymapspace.com ）。 MySpace 已经拥有超过 1.3 亿会员（“人口”已经是英国的两倍多），Facebook 约有 1800 万会员。

2.21 SNS users build profiles about themselves, posting photos, information about their backgrounds, views, work, and so on, and make 'friends' with other users. These networks often enmesh virtual and physical friendship groups as they 'support both distant and geographically proximate relationships' (Golder, et al., n.d.). For example, SNS are often used by people who know each other from colleges or work places to organise physical meetings, to discuss things that happened that day, to set up events and so on. Also users make new connections in the virtual that then later become real-world connections. This creates an interesting convergence of virtual and physical worlds. Connections and friendships now stretch out across physical and virtual spaces as users communicate with 'real-world' friends through SNS and other Web 2.0 applications (Wellman, 2001). University students on the same courses at the same university, for instance, use SNS to discuss their work, lectures and their lecturers (as we shall see below), arrange social events, and share pictures of get-togethers.
2.21 SNS 用户建立自己的个人资料，发布照片、有关其背景、观点、工作等的信息，并与其他用户交“朋友”。这些网络经常将虚拟和实体的友谊团体交织在一起，因为它们“支持远距离和地理上邻近的关系”（ Golder等人， nd）。例如，在大学或工作场所认识的人经常使用 SNS 来组织实体会议、讨论当天发生的事情、安排活动等。用户还可以在虚拟世界中建立新的联系，然后这些联系将成为现实世界的联系。这创造了虚拟世界和物理世界的有趣融合。当用户通过 SNS 和其他 Web 2.0 应用程序与“现实世界”的朋友进行交流时，联系和友谊现在跨越了物理和虚拟空间（ Wellman，2001 ）。例如，在同一所大学学习同一课程的大学生可以使用 SNS 讨论他们的工作、讲座和讲师（如下所示）、安排社交活动并分享聚会照片。

2.22 Already if we search the groups formed on the SNS Facebook (http://www.facebook.com) we find numerous collectives have been formed to discuss sociology and related matters, these include names such as 'Sociology Society', 'Sociology � we like men with beards', and 'The Sociology and Social Policy Elite'. These various groups host sociology students from universities all over the world. Indeed, many sociology students, particularly undergraduates are members of Facebook. The institution at which the authors were based at the time of writing, which has nearly 10,000 students in its network, currently has 268 student profiles connected with sociology (a significant majority of all sociology students)
2.22如果我们搜索 SNS Facebook ( http://www.facebook.com ) 上形成的群组，我们会发现已经形成了许多团体来讨论社会学和相关问题，其中包括诸如“社会学学会”、“社会学”等名称。我们喜欢留胡子的男人”和“社会学和社会政策精英”。这些不同的团体接待来自世界各地大学的社会学学生。事实上，许多社会学学生，尤其是本科生都是 Facebook 的会员。在撰写本文时，作者所在的机构拥有近 10,000 名学生，目前拥有 268 个与社会学相关的学生资料（占所有社会学学生的绝大多数）

2.23 The cultural impact of the new SNS has been significant in another way as well, connected as it is to the rise of particular artists and to a new series of connections between popular music performers and their audience (Beer, 2006). Indeed, it is now the case that 'more than 240,000 artists�are using MySpace as a way to market themselves and build a fanbase' (Cohn, 2005). It is common, almost compulsory, for popular music performers and bands to have profiles on SNS through which they can communicate with their fans (or so we are led to believe). In fact it is now unusual for bands not to have some form of presence. Cohn claims that the change here is that:
2.23新的 SNS 的文化影响在另一方面也具有重大意义，因为它与特定艺术家的崛起以及流行音乐表演者与其观众之间的一系列新联系有关（ Beer，2006 ）。事实上，现在的情况是“超过 240,000 名艺术家正在使用 MySpace 作为推销自己和建立粉丝群的一种方式”（ Cohn，2005 ）。对于流行音乐表演者和乐队来说，在 SNS 上拥有个人资料是很常见的，几乎是强制性的，他们可以通过这些个人资料与粉丝进行交流（或者我们是这么认为的）。事实上，现在乐队没有某种形式的存在是不寻常的。科恩声称这里的变化是：

'For fans, MySpace allows them to keep up-to-date on bands in an intimate way. Fans�can leave comments on a band's site�and band members often respond to fans, creating a real dialogue between artists and their followers.' (Cohn, 2005)
“对于歌迷来说，MySpace 使他们能够以亲密的方式了解乐队的最新动态。粉丝们可以在乐队的网站上发表评论，而乐队成员通常会对粉丝做出回应，从而在艺术家和他们的追随者之间建立真正的对话。 （科恩，2005 ）

2.24 Again the suggestion is that a new series of connections and a 'democratisation' of the musical landscape is emerging as established artists communicate with their public, and where new and unsigned bands can distribute their music, create a fanbase and become popular without the backing of the corporate music industry.
2.24再次建议，随着知名艺术家与公众进行交流，一系列新的联系和音乐景观的“民主化”正在出现，新的和未签约的乐队可以在没有支持的情况下传播他们的音乐，建立粉丝群并变得流行企业音乐产业。

Sociology of Web 2.0  Web 2.0 社会学

3.1 There seems to us to be at least three interrelated issues that the Web 2.0 phenomena invokes that require sociological engagement: the changing relations between the production and consumption of content; the mainstreaming of private information posted to the public domain; and, our main focus here, the emergence of a new rhetoric of 'democratisation'. This is not to say that these are entirely new areas of interest for investigation or that these issues have emerged solely out of Web 2.0 applications, rather what we are pointing toward here are issues that it seems to us are particularly pressing if we wish to move toward sociological accounts of Web 2.0. As these developing online technologies remediate that which went before, so too we find theoretical remediations are required as we rethink familiar sociological issues in light of Web 2.0.
3.1在我们看来，Web 2.0 现象至少引发了三个相互关联的问题，需要社会学的参与：内容生产和消费之间不断变化的关系；将发布到公共领域的私人信息纳入主流；而且，我们这里的主要焦点是“民主化”新说法的出现。这并不是说这些是值得研究的全新领域，也不是说这些问题完全是从 Web 2.0 应用程序中出现的，而是我们在这里指出的是，如果我们希望解决这些问题，我们认为这些问题尤其紧迫走向 Web 2.0 的社会学账户。随着这些正在发展的在线技术修复了以前的问题，我们也发现，当我们根据 Web 2.0 重新思考熟悉的社会学问题时，需要进行理论修复。

The changing relations between the production and consumption of content
内容生产与消费关系的变化

3.2 In a recent report on libraries and Web 2.0, Maness concluded that 'the line between the creation and consumption of content in these environments was blurred' (Maness, 2006). Indeed, the blurring of production and consumption has become a common theme in the literature on the digitization of culture (Taylor, 2001; Th�berge, 1997). Perhaps the key-defining feature of Web 2.0 is that users are involved in processes of production and consumption as they generate and browse online content, as they tag and blog, post and share. This has seen the 'consumer' taking an increasingly active role in the 'production' of commodities (Thrift, 2005). Indeed, it is the mundane personal details posted on profiles, and the connections made with online 'friends', that become the commodities of Web 2.0. It is the profile, the informational archive of individuals' everyday lives, that draws people into the network and which encourages individuals to make 'friends'. In the case of http://www.xuqa.com the popularity of those in the network even takes centre stage in the form of online popularity contests where, the site informs us, users 'socialize and compete to become the richest and most popular person in the game'. In the case of wiki's and folksonomies it is the construction of collaborative projects � as collections of photos or videos and the literature that comes out of communal contribution � that may be understood as the commodity. Although it remains unclear what the motivations for participating in such collaborative ventures are, it is certainly clear that there are millions of (what we might call) 'wikizens' making active contributions to the shaping of content and the virtual spaces through which they navigate.
3.2在最近一份关于图书馆和 Web 2.0 的报告中，Maness 得出的结论是“在这些环境中内容的创建和消费之间的界限是模糊的”（ Maness，2006 ）。事实上，生产和消费的模糊已经成为文化数字化文献中的一个共同主题（ Taylor，2001 ； Th�berge，1997 ）。也许 Web 2.0 的关键定义特征是，用户在生成和浏览在线内容、标记、写博客、发布和共享时参与了生产和消费过程。这使得“消费者”在商品的“生产”中扮演着越来越积极的角色（ Thrift，2005 ）。事实上，个人资料上发布的平凡个人详细信息以及与在线“朋友”建立的联系成为了 Web 2.0 的商品。正是个人资料，即个人日常生活的信息档案，吸引人们进入网络并鼓励个人结交“朋友”。就http://www.xuqa.com而言，网络中的人气甚至以在线人气竞赛的形式占据了中心舞台，该网站告诉我们，用户进行社交活动并竞争成为最富有和最受欢迎的人游戏中的人”。就维基百科和大众分类法而言，它是协作项目的构建——作为来自公共贡献的照片或视频和文献的集合——可以被理解为商品。 尽管目前尚不清楚参与此类合作的动机是什么，但很明显，有数百万（我们可能称之为）“wikizen”为内容的塑造和他们所浏览的虚拟空间做出了积极的贡献。

3.3 The pressing questions here relate to the 'cultural circuits of capital' (Thrift, 2005) that underpin Web 2.0. First, it is important to note that although these networks are free-to-access and user-generated they remain overwhelmingly commercial. Second, it is the user profile that has become the commodity of Web 2.0, as users engage in simultaneous acts of production and consumption. This is not just the profiles of cultural luminaries, but also of the 'ordinary' user. Even making connections in the network is an act of production as it generates a path with its own history. This is illustrated most clearly by the SNS Facebook, which provides news about what your 'friends' have been up to every time you log-on (this includes the people they have made 'friends' with, the groups they have joined, and the changes they have made to their profiles). We return here to Lash's (2006) emphasis upon the importance of 'the feed' and the image of the data actively 'finding' us. The movement toward the user-generated profile as commodity, and even the collaborative accumulation of repositories of the wiki, folksonomy and mashup, may be understood in broader terms as a part of the 'changes in the form of the commodity [that] point to the increasingly active role that the consumer is often expected to take.' (Thrift, 2005: 7). Understanding these commodities requires analytic attention to be focused on the transformation in the nature of the relations between production and consumption as they become simultaneous and even ambient in the routine activities that generate the content of Web 2.0.
3.3这里紧迫的问题涉及支撑 Web 2.0 的“资本文化循环”（ Thrift，2005 ）。首先，值得注意的是，尽管这些网络是免费访问且由用户生成的，但它们仍然绝大多数是商业性的。其次，用户档案已成为 Web 2.0 的商品，因为用户同时进行生产和消费行为。这不仅是文化名人的个人资料，也是“普通”用户的个人资料。即使在网络中建立连接也是一种生产行为，因为它会生成一条具有自己历史的路径。 SNS Facebook 最清楚地说明了这一点，它提供有关您每次登录时“朋友”的动态的新闻（这包括他们交过“朋友”的人、他们加入的群组以及您的“好友”）。他们对个人资料所做的更改）。在这里，我们回到 Lash（ 2006 ）强调的“提要”的重要性以及主动“找到”我们的数据形象。将用户生成的配置文件作为商品的趋势，甚至维基、大众分类和混搭存储库的协作积累，都可以从更广泛的角度理解为“指向商品形式的变化”的一部分。人们通常期望消费者扮演越来越积极的角色。 （节俭，2005 ：7）。了解这些商品需要将分析注意力集中在生产和消费关系性质的转变上，因为它们在生成 Web 2.0 内容的日常活动中变得同步甚至是环境。

The mainstreaming of private information posted to the public domain
将发布到公共领域的私人信息纳入主流

3.4 The act of production, particularly in the case of SNS, creates a situation in which private information becomes open and accessible to anyone with access to the Internet. Thoughts, views, education/employment information, personal photographs and so on become accessible as private information is posted to the public domain. Indeed, one might think about this as another manifestation of a more general process associated with the new technologies that seems to necessitate the ever more detailed codification of habitus (Burrows and Gane, 2006). This, in itself, is an interesting shift in the values of privacy that people attach to such information, as wikizens are willing to detail some of the most private information about themselves where anyone can access it, and this, of course, also raises a number of pressing questions about surveillance. Who is accessing this information? What are they using it for? Already it has been reported that the Pentagon's National Security Agency is funding research into the 'mass harvesting of information' posted on social networking sites (Marks, 2006).
3.4生产行为，特别是在 SNS 的情况下，创造了一种私人信息变得开放并可供任何能够访问互联网的人访问的情况。当私人信息发布到公共领域时，思想、观点、教育/就业信息、个人照片等都变得可以访问。事实上，人们可能会认为这是与新技术相关的更普遍过程的另一种表现，似乎需要对习惯进行更详细的编纂（ Burrows 和 Gane，2006 ）。这本身就是人们对此类信息的隐私价值观的一个有趣的转变，因为维基百科愿意详细说明一些关于他们自己的最私密的信息，任何人都可以访问它，当然，这也引起了人们的关注。有关监视的一些紧迫问题。谁在访问这些信息？他们用它做什么？据报道，五角大楼国家安全局正在资助对社交网站上发布的“大规模收集信息”的研究（ Marks，2006 ）。

3.5 A recent study of MIT students disclosure of information and the protection of this information on Facebook found that 'Facebook was firmly entrenched in college student's lives, but users had not restricted who had access to this portion of their life' (Jones and Soltern, 2005: 4). In addition to this the researchers found that 'third parties were actively seeking out information' (Jones and Soltern, 2005: 4). In this instance the researchers concluded that in light of the threat to privacy it will come down to the 'common sense' of users to moderate the disclosure of their own information as they become aware of the consequences. However, it would seem that these notions of 'common sense' will more than likely have shifted along with changes in understandings and values attached to privacy. In other words we see little attempt here to conceal information. Rather the emphasis appears to be about revealing as much information as possible in line with the projected image that the user wishes to cultivate.
3.5最近一项关于麻省理工学院学生在 Facebook 上披露信息和保护这些信息的研究发现，“Facebook 已经牢牢扎根于大学生的生活中，但用户并没有限制谁可以访问他们生活的这一部分”（ Jones 和 Soltern， 2005 年：4)。除此之外，研究人员发现“第三方正在积极寻找信息”（ Jones 和 Soltern，2005 ：4）。在这种情况下，研究人员得出的结论是，鉴于对隐私的威胁，当用户意识到后果时，将归结为用户的“常识”，以适度披露自己的信息。然而，这些“常识”的概念很可能会随着对隐私的理解和价值观的变化而发生变化。换句话说，我们在这里几乎看不到隐瞒信息的企图。相反，重点似乎是根据用户希望培养的投影图像来揭示尽可能多的信息。

3.6 The more general point here though is that as users participate in generating or producing content they build up an archive of their 'everyday life' that is openly accessible. As we have noted, this type of information about preferences, choices, and other personal details are considered valuable in an age of 'knowing capitalism' where data-mining and predictive technologies are prominent. But the self-production of such data also allows for the emergence of a new more general culture of 'sort' to be facilitated. It is not just places (Burrows and Ellison, 2004) or those looking for 'love' (Suna et al., 2006) that are now being 'sorted' and/or 'matched' � something far more generic is happening. The browsing function on MySpace is interesting here. Selecting the 'advanced' option for browsing generates a form that enables profiles to be found that fit certain criteria. Profiles can be located by entering responses to a range of criteria including: gender; age; relationship status; what they are looking to get out the network; geographical location (including distance from a particular postcode); ethnicity; body-type; height; sexual orientation; education; religion; income; number of children; and so on. Browsing these criteria generates a list of profiles that fit and that may be ordered in relation to proximity to the stated location or some other criteria. Similarly on Facebook, we may click on a preference, a favourite film or musician for instance, and a list of members of the network who share that preference is generated. These then form vast expanses of data about people that can be sorted and accessed.
3.6不过，这里更普遍的一点是，当用户参与生成或制作内容时，他们会建立一个可公开访问的“日常生活”档案。正如我们所指出的，在数据​​挖掘和预测技术占主导地位的“了解资本主义”时代，此类有关偏好、选择和其他个人详细信息的信息被认为是有价值的。但此类数据的自我生产也促进了一种新的、更普遍的“排序”文化的出现。现在被“排序”和/或“匹配”的不仅仅是地点（ Burrows 和 Ellison，2004 ）或那些寻找“爱”的地方（ Suna等人，2006 ）——更普遍的事情正在发生。 MySpace 上的浏览​​功能在这里很有趣。选择“高级”浏览选项会生成一个表单，可以找到符合特定条件的配置文件。可以通过输入对一系列标准的回答来找到个人资料，包括：性别；年龄;关系状况；他们想从网络中获取什么；地理位置（包括距特定邮政编码的距离）；种族;体型；高度;性取向；教育;宗教;收入;儿童数量；等等。浏览这些标准会生成适合的配置文件列表，并且可以根据与指定位置的接近度或一些其他标准来排序。类似地，在 Facebook 上，我们可以点击一个偏好，例如最喜欢的电影或音乐家，然后就会生成共享该偏好的网络成员列表。然后，这些数据形成大量可以排序和访问的有关人员的数据。

A new rhetoric of 'democratisation'
“民主化”的新说辞

3.7 Finally, Web 2.0 has been ushered in by what might be a thought of as rhetoric of 'democratisation'. This is defined by stories and images of 'the people' reclaiming the Internet and taking control of its content; a kind of 'people's internet' or less positivley, the emergence of the cult of the amataur (Keen, 2007). This, we are led to believe, has led to a new collaborative, participatory or open culture, where anyone can get involved, and everyone has the potential to be seen or heard. According to this vision there are opportunities for our thoughts to get heard, our videos to be seen, and our music to be listened to. This rhetoric demands detailed and critical interrogation to reveal: how it is formed; the formation of new hierarchies and social divisions; the power of the new culture industries; the problems and subversions afforded by the collaborative culture; patterns of social participation; the creation of new 'in-crowds'; the operations of new viral marketing strategies; and, who it is that gets heard above the din that is Web 2.0. As we have noted, despite the rhetoric of 'democratisation' Web 2.0 is a commercial and lightly regulated market. It is then also a space where a virulent form of consumerism can easily undermine 'democratic ideals'. Many service providers who are already subject to comment on sites such as http://www.tripadvisor.co.ukor the reviews and feedback sections of retail sites such as http://www.amazon.co.uk, know about the implications of this. Colleagues in academia have, hitherto, not been subject to such processes. However, it is on the way.
3.7最后，Web 2.0 的出现可能被视为“民主化”的言论。这是通过“人民”夺回互联网并控制其内容的故事和图像来定义的；一种“人民的互联网”，或者说不太积极的，是对业余爱好者的崇拜的出现（ Keen，2007 ）。我们相信，这导致了一种新的协作、参与或开放文化，任何人都可以参与其中，每个人都有可能被看到或听到。根据这一愿景，我们的想法有机会被听到，我们的视频有机会被观看，我们的音乐有机会被听到。这种言论需要详细而批判性的审问才能揭示：它是如何形成的；它是如何形成的；新的等级制度和社会分化的形成；新文化产业的力量；协作文化带来的问题和颠覆；社会参与模式；创建新的“人群”；新病毒式营销策略的运作；而且，是谁在 Web 2.0 的喧嚣中被听到。正如我们所指出的，尽管有“民主化”的说法，Web 2.0 仍然是一个商业化且监管宽松的市场。这也是一个恶性消费主义形式很容易破坏“民主理想”的空间。许多已经在http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk等网站或http://www.amazon.co.uk等零售网站的评论和反馈部分发表评论的服务提供商都知道这的影响。迄今为止，学术界的同事还没有经历过这样的过程。然而，它正在路上。

3.8 Consider, by way of example, Facebook in the UK. As we noted above (at the time of writing) at our own institution nearly 10,000 students are registered with this popular SNS. Over one-half of those registered check their profiles at least once a day. Not surprisingly, some of the discussion is about academic staff. As part of Facebook one is able to form various groups; so we have a Sociology Society for example that has 150 members, an Urbaphilia group for staff and students interested in urban studies, a feminist conversation analysis group and so on. Students also form groups dedicated to the dis/appreciation of various staff members (none from Sociology as it turns out) � often with overtones of sarcasm and in-jokes that are not always easy to decipher. So, one group describes its function as follows:
3.8以英国的 Facebook 为例。正如我们上面指出的（在撰写本文时），我们自己的机构有近 10,000 名学生注册了这个流行的 SNS。超过一半的注册者每天至少检查一次他们的个人资料。毫不奇怪，一些讨论是关于学术人员的。作为 Facebook 的一部分，人们可以组建各种群组；例如，我们有一个拥有 150 名成员的社会学协会、一个由对城市研究感兴趣的教职员工和学生组成的城市爱好小组、一个女权主义对话分析小组等等。学生们还组成专门针对各种工作人员的不满/欣赏的小组（事实证明，这些工作人员都不是来自社会学）——通常带有讽刺和笑话的暗示，这些内容并不总是容易理解。因此，一组人将其功能描述如下：

This group is for the many who have fallen asleep or skipped X's lectures, and also for the few that endured great boredom by actually attending them.
这个小组是为那些睡着了或跳过 X 的讲座的人准备的，也为那些忍受了巨大无聊而实际参加讲座的人准备的。

Another as a:   另一个作为：

Group dedicated to the University's worst lecturer�If you have ever had the displeasure of sitting through one of her lectures you will know the burning desire to end your life because she is that bad.
致力于大学最糟糕讲师的小组。如果您曾经不愉快地听完她的一场讲座，您就会知道结束自己生命的强烈愿望，因为她就是那么糟糕。

Example postings include the suggestion that:
示例帖子包括以下建议：

We should get a petition going against the worst lecturers teaching us the hardest modules! Or just send the department the link to this page.
我们应该收到一份请愿书，反对最差的讲师教我们最难的模块！或者直接向部门发送此页面的链接。

3.9 Other postings are openly sexist and offensive. One member of staff about to go on maternity leave is subject to a discussion that includes the comment:
3.9其他帖子具有公开的性别歧视和攻击性。一名即将休产假的员工受到了讨论，其中包括以下评论：

Hold on, pregnant AGAIN? Is this the same pregnancy as was at the end of last year or a whole new one? If the latter, she certainly doesn't waste time, does she?
等等，又怀孕了？这次怀孕是去年年底的同一次怀孕还是全新的怀孕？如果是后者，她当然不会浪费时间，不是吗？

3.10 Also, in a separate incident a Facebook group was set up with the express intention of complaining about a particular exam paper. The group accumulated over 170 members and was used as the hub for coordinating the student complaints. This included the posting of a letter that could be cut and pasted with email links for where to send it.
3.10此外，在另一起事件中，人们设立了一个 Facebook 群组，其明确意图是投诉某份试卷。该小组共有超过 170 名成员，并被用作协调学生投诉的中心。这包括发布一封可以剪切并粘贴电子邮件链接的信件，以告知发送地点。

3.11 The press has picked up on some of the implications of these Web 2.0 technologies for higher education after students posted mobile phone video material of lecturers on YouTube without their knowledge or permission (Baty & Bins, 2007). One unfortunate academic filmed scratching his crotch during a lecture had to endure the clip being downloaded from the site over 8000 times. But the implications go far further than being merely scandalous as we face up to what are effectively dehumanised accounts of lecturers. What are the implications for the health and welfare of staff on the receiving end of such public criticism? Imagine the anguish of discovering a Facebook group dedicated to ridiculing you, where your perceived inadequacies and even personal issues are being discussed by students in an open forum. And what of the students who open up their private life and thoughts to a public audience? The posts made are automatically connected to the user and their profile so can easily be tracked back. Who is watching? The university? Future employers? Is this empowering anyone? Are formal systems of measurement and feedback being bypassed by these informal postings and ratings? Are staff and students more accountable? These are significant questions that lead into even larger ones concerning the future of surveillance, trust and privacy in a Web 2.0 enabled consumer society. We also see here links to issues encountered in other sectors, and particularly the health sector, with regard to the consequences of the availability of this type of information for working practices and self-identity. There are new and forthcoming emotional challenges here facing those working in academia and across a range of areas.
3.11学生们在未经其同意或不知情的情况下将讲师的手机视频材料发布到 YouTube 上后，媒体开始认识到这些 Web 2.0 技术对高等教育的一些影响（ Baty & Bins，2007 年）。一位不幸的学者在一次演讲中被拍到抓挠自己的胯部，不得不忍受该视频被从网站下载了 8000 多次。但当我们面对对讲师的非人性描述时，其影响远不止是丑闻。受到此类公众批评的员工的健康和福利有何影响？想象一下，如果发现一个专门嘲笑你的 Facebook 群组，学生们在一个开放的论坛上讨论你认为的不足，甚至是个人问题，那会是多么痛苦。那些向公众开放私生活和想法的学生又怎样呢？发布的帖子会自动连接到用户及其个人资料，因此可以轻松追踪。谁在看？大学？未来的雇主？这是否赋予任何人权力？这些非正式的帖子和评级是否绕过了正式的衡量和反馈系统？教职员工和学生是否更有责任感？这些都是重要的问题，会导致有关 Web 2.0 消费者社会中的监视、信任和隐私的未来的更大问题。我们还在这里看到了其他部门，特别是卫生部门遇到的问题的链接，涉及此类信息的可用性对工作实践和自我认同的影响。学术界和各个领域的工作人员面临着新的和即将到来的情感挑战。

3.12 These largely unsystematic evaluations of the work of academics on UK SNS pale into insignificance in comparison with what is already quite mundane in a North American context. Other Web 2.0 sites, themselves often linked to SNS, offer open access comment on all staff in all institutions of higher learning by students. For example http://www.ratemyprofessors.com advertised as 'where students do the grading' contains more than 6,750,000 separate ratings of over 1 million academic staff working in over 6000 institutions in the USA and Canada. The site also has provision for comments about staff in the UK but (so far) there has been little traffic.
3.12与北美背景下已经相当平常的情况相比，英国 SNS 上对学者工作的这些基本上不系统的评价显得微不足道。其他 Web 2.0 网站本身通常与 SNS 链接，提供学生对所有高等教育机构的所有教职员工的开放访问评论。例如， http://www.ratemyprofessors.com宣传为“学生进行评分的地方”，其中包含对美国和加拿大 6000 多个机构的超过 100 万学术人员的超过 6,750,000 条单独评分。该网站还提供有关英国员工的评论，但（到目前为止）流量很少。

3.13 On these sites students can not only grade staff using quantitative scales (rather like most systems of formal course evaluations) they can also rate the sexual attractiveness of the member of staff (by allocating a number of red hot chilli peppers as a measure of their 'hotness'). However, it is the free-form comments that must be of most concern to readers. Examining the entries of a well-respected Department of Sociology we find one member of staff who has been rated by almost 40 students. He is apparently very highly regarded as he is rated very highly on all of the scales and, in addition, is considered to be rated 'hot' in terms of attractiveness. His qualitative evaluations are glowing:
3.13在这些网站上，学生不仅可以使用定量量表对教职员工进行评分（就像大多数正式课程评估系统一样），还可以对教职员工的性吸引力进行评分（通过分配一些红辣椒来衡量其性吸引力）。 ‘热度’)。然而，读者最关心的一定是自由形式的评论。在检查一个备受尊敬的社会学系的条目时，我们发现一名教职员工已被近 40 名学生评分。他显然受到了很高的评价，因为他在所有方面都得到了很高的评价，此外，在吸引力方面也被认为是“热门”。他的定性评价非常出色：

Simply the best Prof I have ever had!!! He is smart, has a sense of humour, and he just brilliant! If you are going to take theory, take it with Dr X. you will not regret it, and there cannot be a better Prof to teach your weber, marx and durkheim!!!
简直是我遇到过的最好的教授！他很聪明，有幽默感，而且他太聪明了！如果你要学习理论，那就和 X 博士一起学习。你不会后悔的，没有比这更好的教授来教你的韦伯、马克思和涂尔干了！

The best lecturer ever. I never thought theory could be so interesting. He's hilarious and brilliant. He can make any topic interesting. Marking and tests are fair. Would love to take more classes with him.
有史以来最好的讲师。我从没想过理论可以这么有趣。他很搞笑，也很聪明。他可以让任何话题变得有趣。评分和测试是公平的。很想和他一起上更多的课。

3.14 However, not all staff are so well respected. One staff member rated very poorly on all scales (resulting in a blue coloured 'smiley' face looking very upset) is subjected to what can only be described as abuse:
3.14然而，并非所有工作人员都受到如此尊重。一名工作人员在所有方面的评分都非常差（导致蓝色“笑脸”看起来非常沮丧）受到了只能被描述为虐待的情况：

I hate him so much. He missed 4 classes, and when he did show up, I was elsewhere quietly protesting. Should read more contemporary urban theory and get out of the 1970s.
我非常恨他。他缺席了四节课，当他出现时，我在别处悄悄抗议。应该阅读更多当代城市理论并摆脱 20 世纪 70 年代。

He is an unorganized, pompous, inconsiderate and lazy teacher. I wish I had never wasted time and money on his class.
他是一位散漫、浮夸、不体贴、懒惰的老师。我希望我从来没有在他的课上浪费时间和金钱。

3.15 Another example, explicitly linked to Facebook in the USA, is a mashup called http://www.pickaprof.com, which presents information on over 98,750,000 grade histories, almost 11.5 million ratings and reviews on over 880,000 Professors by 580,000 Facebook 'friends'. So, if we look at Michael Mann at UCLA again � probably one of the most prestigious and pre-eminent British sociologists of his generation - who we have already met in a video downloaded from YouTube we can see that of the 14 students who took one of his modules 53 per cent obtained 'A' grades and 47 per cent got a 'B' - a GPA of 3.57.
3.15另一个例子，在美国与 Facebook 明确链接，是一个名为http://www.pickaprof.com的混搭，它提供了超过 98,750,000 个成绩历史记录、近 1150 万个评级以及 580,000 个 Facebook“朋友”对超过 880,000 名教授的评论的信息'。因此，如果我们再次看看加州大学洛杉矶分校的迈克尔·曼（Michael Mann），他可能是他这一代最负盛名、最杰出的英国社会学家之一，我们已经在从 YouTube 下载的视频中见过他，我们可以看到参加一门课程的 14 名学生中的情况。在他的模块中，53% 的学生获得“A”成绩，47% 的学生获得“B”成绩，即 GPA 为 3.57。

Sociology in Web 2.0?  Web 2.0 中的社会学？

4.1 Before entering into a discussion of the things we have highlighted above it is necessary first to clarify our position. When we talk, for instance, of a rhetoric of democratisation we are not talking of Web 2.0 as a democratising force. We are instead pointing to the way in which Web 2.0 is being constructed or, as we say here, ushered in by particular discursive frameworks. It is not really our place at this juncture to say if Web 2.0 is empowering or democratising, it is too early; conversely we do not wish to cultivate a moral panic over the consequences of these things. We are also happy to accept that 'Web 2.0' may have already become a 'zombie category' (Beck, 2004). As such the benefit of using Web 2.0 terminology is open to debate. Maybe it is here that sociology could begin to make a contribution?
4.1在开始讨论我们上面强调的事情之前，有必要首先澄清我们的立场。例如，当我们谈论民主化的言论时，我们并不是在谈论作为民主化力量的 Web 2.0。相反，我们指出的是 Web 2.0 的构建方式，或者正如我们在这里所说的，由特定的话语框架引入的方式。在这个节骨眼上，我们确实不适合说 Web 2.0 是赋权还是民主化，现在还为时过早。相反，我们不希望对这些事情的后果造成道德恐慌。我们也很高兴地接受“Web 2.0”可能已经成为“僵尸类别”（ Beck，2004 ）。因此，使用 Web 2.0 术语的好处是有争议的。也许正是在这里，社会学可以开始做出贡献？

4.2 In this paper we have briefly highlighted a range of 'flickering connectivities' (Hayles, 2005), or, in the case of SNS, flickering friendships. Understanding these connectivities, their motivations, how they come about, the hierarchies and divisions, and even who it is that populate and contribute to these applications is a problem with which we are now faced if we wish to form sociological understandings of Web 2.0. As we indicated at the outset of this paper, it is our sense that by the time this paper is published this type of user-generated application - whether we continue to refer to it as Web 2.0 or some other such term - will have become part of the cultural mainstream. There is a possibility that the technologies we have described are contributing to a major remediation of television, radio, music, writing, art, possibly academia, and even the processes of meeting people and making 'friends'. It is the place and responsibility of sociology to react. The question then, even if we wish to delve further into a range of sociological issues to append the brief list we have summarised above, is how?
4.2在本文中，我们简要强调了一系列“闪烁的联系”（ Hayles，2005 ），或者就 SNS 而言，闪烁的友谊。如果我们希望形成对 Web 2.0 的社会学理解，那么理解这些连接、它们的动机、它们如何产生、层次结构和划分，甚至是谁填充和贡献这些应用程序，就是我们现在面临的一个问题。正如我们在本文开头所指出的，我们认为，到本文发表时，这种类型的用户生成的应用程序（无论我们继续将其称为 Web 2.0 还是其他此类术语）将成为 Web 2.0 的一部分。的文化主流。我们所描述的技术有可能正在为电视、广播、音乐、写作、艺术、可能的学术界、甚至是结识人们和结交“朋友”的过程做出重大补救。这是社会学做出反应的地方和责任。那么，即使我们希望进一步深入研究一系列社会学问题以附加我们上面总结的简短列表，问题是如何？

4.3 One possibility is that future research will have to 'come from inside the information itself' (Lash, 2002: vii). There are two issues here. First, we need to be inside of the networks, online communities, and collaborative movements to be able to see what is going on and describe it. If we take Facebook for instance, it is not possible to enter into and observe the network without becoming a member, providing an institutional email, entering some personal details and generating a profile. Therefore, in order to get some idea of users and their practices it is necessary to become a 'wikizen'. The social researcher will need to be immersed, they will need to be participatory, and they will need to 'get inside' and make some 'friends'. We will have to become part of the collaborative cultures of Web 2.0, we will need to build our own profiles, make some flickering friendships, expose our own choices, preferences and views, and make ethical decisions about what we reveal and the information we filter out of these communities and into our findings. Our ability to carry out virtual ethnographies will � by necessity � involve moving from the role of observer to that of participant observer.
4.3一种可能性是，未来的研究必须“来自信息本身”（ Lash，2002 ：vii）。这里有两个问题。首先，我们需要进入网络、在线社区和协作运动的内部，以便能够看到正在发生的事情并对其进行描述。如果我们以 Facebook 为例，如果不成为会员、提供机构电子邮件、输入一些个人详细信息并生成个人资料，就不可能进入并观察该网络。因此，为了了解用户及其实践，有必要成为“wikizen”。社会研究者需要沉浸其中，需要参与，需要“深入其中”并结交一些“朋友”。我们必须成为 Web 2.0 协作文化的一部分，我们需要建立自己的档案，建立一些短暂的友谊，暴露我们自己的选择、偏好和观点，并对我们所披露的内容和我们过滤的信息做出道德决定走出这些社区并融入我们的发现。我们进行虚拟民族志的能力“必然”涉及从观察者的角色转变为参与观察者的角色。

4.4 A second issue is that once inside these networks we may explore the possibilities of using Web 2.0 applications, and particularly the interactive potentials of SNS, as research tools or research technologies (this is not necessarily limited to research into Web 2.0, SNS could be used to conduct research on any topic). Interviews and even focus groups could comfortably be conducted through SNS, either privately or in the open. Of course, there are a range of alternatives here. We can imagine the construction of virtual ethnographies accounting for these communities of users and their practices. Perhaps, more significantly, what we have, particularly with SNS, are vast archives on the everyday lives of individuals - a sort of ongoing codification of habitus - their preferences, choices, views, gender, physical attributes, geographical location, background, employment and educational history, photographs of them in different places, with different people and different things. These are open and accessible archives of (what was once thought of as sensitive) information that may be used to develop understandings of these people and to track out communities or networks of friends. These archives could be used to track preferences, connections, personal histories, views, friendships that may be data-mined, mapped, network analysed, discourse analysed and so on. There are possibilities then for tailoring innovative research strategies that take advantage of the interactive potentials of these new media and of the data that they hold. But can we, should we, use it to study itself?
4.4第二个问题是，一旦进入这些网络，我们可能会探索使用 Web 2.0 应用程序的可能性，特别是 SNS 的交互潜力，作为研究工具或研究技术（这不一定限于对 Web 2.0 的研究，SNS 可以是用于对任何主题进行研究）。采访甚至焦点小组都可以通过社交网络轻松地进行，无论是私下还是公开的。当然，这里有一系列替代方案。我们可以想象构建虚拟民族志来解释这些用户社区及其实践。或许，更重要的是，我们拥有的，尤其是社交网络上的，是关于个人日常生活的大量档案——一种持续的惯习编纂——他们的偏好、选择、观点、性别、身体特征、地理位置、背景、就业和教育历史，他们在不同地方、与不同的人和不同的事物的照片。这些是开放且可访问的（曾经被认为是敏感的）信息档案，可用于加深对这些人的了解并追踪社区或朋友网络。这些档案可用于跟踪偏好、联系、个人历史、观点、友谊，可以进行数据挖掘、映射、网络分析、话语分析等。那么就有可能制定创新的研究策略，利用这些新媒体及其所持有的数据的交互潜力。但我们可以、应该用它来研究它自己吗？

4.5 As sociologists what we may need to do is take a leaf out of the 'wikizens' book and adapt to the possibilities of research from within the information flows. Mimicking, in a sense, the desire of wikizens to find out about each other and the connections people make by browsing through SNS. 'Wikizens' are already engaged in sociological research of sorts (Hardey and Burrows, 2008). SNS in particular reveal a sociological tendency in web users as they search and browse through profiles of their fellow 'wikizens', reading about them, looking at photographs and so on. This engagement in a vernacular sociology � an ongoing interest in the mundane lives of other people � could be read as a potentially positive thing (as people are seen to take an interest in one another). However, we are not really sure, apart from the practices intimated by our cursory investigations, how people use these networks or for what outcome. It would seem that we have seen a radical shift in senses and values of privacy, where people are prepared to expose details about themselves without concern, the formation of web cultures that are about getting noticed, accumulating 'friends', posting videos and music that gets circulated, and all of the rest. We may, for instance, begin to place Web 2.0 into broader contexts of celebrity culture � the celebration of the mundane, reality TV, celebrity reality TV, gossip magazines, and the 'voting out' cultures of X-factor and any other number of programmes. It is certain that one significant difference between the citizen and the 'wikizen' is the value that they place on privacy.
4.5作为社会学家，我们可能需要做的是借鉴“wikizens”的书籍，并适应信息流中研究的可能性。从某种意义上说，模仿了维基百科中的人们通过浏览 SNS 来了解彼此以及建立联系的愿望。 “维基百科”已经开始从事各种社会学研究（ Hardey 和 Burrows，2008 ）。 SNS 尤其揭示了网络用户在搜索和浏览“维基百科”同伴的个人资料、阅读有关他们的信息、查看照片等时的社会学倾向。这种对白话社会学的参与——对其他人平凡生活的持续兴趣——可以被解读为一件潜在的积极的事情（因为人们被认为对彼此感兴趣）。然而，除了我们粗略调查所暗示的做法之外，我们并不确定人们如何使用这些网络或达到什么结果。我们似乎已经看到隐私意识和价值观发生了根本性转变，人们准备毫无顾虑地暴露自己的详细信息，网络文化的形成注重引起关注、积累“朋友”、发布视频和音乐被传播，以及所有其他的。例如，我们可以开始将 Web 2.0 置于更广泛的名人文化背景中——庆祝平凡、真人秀、名人真人秀、八卦杂志以及 X-factor 和任何其他数量的“投票退出”文化。节目。可以肯定的是，公民和“wikizen”之间的一个显着区别是他们对隐私的重视。

4.6 In terms of conceptualising this change it would seem that Urry's (2003) recent call for new concepts that better capture the contemporary complexity turn is entirely fitting. There are clearly possibilities for generating new concepts or for reinvigorating old concepts in light of what is happening. On the later we can imagine reworkings of the concept of the fl�neur for instance. Here we can visualise the 'wikizen' as fl�neur, wandering without direction around wikis, folksonomies, mashups and SNS, taking in the surroundings without concern for a final destination. Indeed, recently the fl�neur has been re-energised as a concept for understanding the experiences of virtual space � the 'virtual fl�neur' (Featherstone, 1998), the 'cyborg' fl�neur (Shields, 2006), and the 'fl�neur electronique' (Atkinson & Willis, 2007). The problem is that unlike the fl�neur wandering around the Paris arcades as described in Benjamin's 1930s Arcades Project (1999), or even the more recent reworkings of the fl�neur wandering around virtual space, the wikizen is instead involved in generating and shaping the environments that they wander through and observe. The point here is that in light of Web 2.0 it is necessary to reconsider how we conceptualise what is happening. The first step may well be to construct more complete and differentiated descriptions of what is happening in Web 2.0, who is involved, and the practices entailed, in order to inform and enrich new concepts or reworkings of our theoretical staples. It is here that a movement toward a more descriptive sociology may fit.
4.6就这一变化的概念化而言，Urry（ 2003 ）最近呼吁更好地捕捉当代复杂性转变的新概念似乎是完全合适的。根据正在发生的事情，显然有可能产生新概念或重振旧概念。例如，在后者中，我们可以想象对漫游者概念的重新诠释。在这里，我们可以将“wikizen”想象成漫游者，在维基、大众分类、混搭和社交网络上毫无方向地徘徊，不关心最终目的地，而是融入周围的环境。事实上，最近，漫游者作为一个理解虚拟空间体验的概念重新焕发活力——“虚拟漫游者”（ Featherstone，1998 ）、“赛博格”漫游者（ Shields，2006 ）和“电子漫游者”（ Atkinson & Willis，2007 ）。问题在于，与本杰明的 1930 年代拱廊计划（ 1999 ）中描述的在巴黎拱廊中闲逛的漫游者不同，甚至与在虚拟空间中漫游的漫游者的最新改造不同，维基百科反而参与了生成和塑造他们漫步和观察的环境。这里的要点是，鉴于 Web 2.0，有必要重新考虑我们如何概念化正在发生的事情。第一步很可能是对 Web 2.0 中正在发生的事情、参与人员以及所需的实践构建更完整和差异化的描述，以便为新概念或对我们理论主要内容的改造提供信息和丰富。正是在这里，走向更具描述性的社会学运动可能是合适的。

4.7 As a final note, once we have entered into these Web 2.0 applications it may also be worth giving some thought as to how they may be used to teach sociology. We can imagine here students building their own sociologically motivated mashups, collaborating to put together wiki's on sociological topics, running seminars online through SNS, continuing to use SNS groups and profiles to informally discuss sociology or using folksonomies to tag and collate sociology content online (allowing students to create their own reading lists, or perhaps even using SNS as archived data sources on which to draw for short term research projects and dissertations). Of course, this may already be happening.
4.7最后一点，一旦我们进入了这些 Web 2.0 应用程序，我们也可能值得思考一下如何使用它们来教授社会学。我们可以想象学生们构建自己的社会学动机混搭，合作将社会学主题的 wiki 放在一起，通过 SNS 在线举办研讨会，继续使用 SNS 群组和个人资料非正式地讨论社会学或使用大众分类法在线标记和整理社会学内容（允许学生创建自己的阅读列表，甚至可能使用 SNS 作为存档数据源，用于短期研究项目和论文）。当然，这可能已经发生了。

4.8 We set out from the premise that what is needed is a renewed interest in sociological description. Admittedly we have not been able to offer the depth of description here that we would have liked � although one of the many benefits of publishing this article in Sociological Research Online is that the reader can click on links to investigate the examples further. We would emphasise that this piece is really only a cursory introduction and represents only some early thoughts on a topic that now requires sustained attention from sociologists in the round, and not just those with substantive interests in new media. At the moment it is hard to locate areas that go untouched by the implications of user-generated and openly accessible content � and these implications are sure to spread out across social and cultural spheres over the coming months and years. As we have pointed out here, it even has a range of implications for us as sociologists. Not only does it create for us new opportunities for research, and maybe teaching, but these applications are already being used to say things about us, about the concepts and writers that we use, about our teaching, and about our institutions. Whatever we may choose to call it, it is important that we at least acknowledge that we are being subject to processes of remediation, and to begin to think through how we might respond.
4.8我们的前提是，我们需要的是对社会学描述重新产生兴趣。诚然，我们无法在这里提供我们希望的深度描述——尽管在社会学研究在线发表这篇文章的众多好处之一是读者可以单击链接进一步研究示例。我们要强调的是，这篇文章实际上只是一个粗略的介绍，仅代表了对这个话题的一些早期想法，这个话题现在需要社会学家的全面持续关注，而不仅仅是那些对新媒体有实质性兴趣的人。目前，很难找到不受用户生成和公开访问内容影响的领域，而这些影响肯定会在未来几个月和几年内蔓延到社会和文化领域。正如我们在这里指出的，它甚至对我们社会学家有一系列的影响。它不仅为我们创造了新的研究机会，也许还为教学创造了新的机会，而且这些应用程序已经被用来描述我们、我们使用的概念和作者、我们的教学以及我们的机构。无论我们选择如何称呼它，重要的是我们至少承认我们正在接受补救过程，并开始思考我们如何应对。

---

References  参考

ATKINSON, R. & Willis, P. (2007) 'Charting the Ludodrome: The mediation of urban and simulated space and the rise of the fl�neur electronique' Information, Communication & Society vol. 11, no. 6, forthcoming.
ATKINSON , R. 和 Willis, P. (2007)“绘制卢多德罗姆地图：城市和模拟空间的中介以及漫游电子的兴起” 《信息、通信与社会》卷。 11、没有。 6、即将推出。

BAUDRILLARD, J. (2001) Impossible Exchange, Verso, London.
BAUDRILLARD , J. (2001) 《不可能的交换》 ，Verso，伦敦。

BAUDRILLARD, J. (2002) The Spirit of Terrorism, Verso, London.
BAUDRILLARD , J. (2002) 《恐怖主义的精神》 ，Verso，伦敦。

BATY, P. & Binns, A. (2007) 'Lecturers pilloried online', The Times Higher Education Supplement, 2 March, p.1 and pp.8-9.
BATY , P. 和 Binns, A. (2007)“讲师在网上受到嘲笑”， 《泰晤士报高等教育增刊》 ，3 月 2 日，第 1 页和第 8-9 页。

BECK, U. (2002) 'The Cosmopolitan Society and its Enemies', Theory, Culture & Society, vol. 19, no. 1-2, pp. 17-44.
BECK , U. (2002)“世界主义社会及其敌人”，理论、文化与社会，卷。 19、没有。 1-2，第 17-44 页。

BEER, D. (2006) 'The Pop-Pickers Have Picked Decentralised Media: The Fall of Top of the Pops and the Rise of the Second Media Age', Sociological Research Online, vol. 11, no. 3, <http://www.socresonline.org.uk/11/3/beer.html>
BEER , D. (2006)“流行选择者选择了去中心化媒体：流行顶端的衰落和第二媒体时代的崛起”，社会学研究在线，卷。 11、没有。 3、< http://www.socresonline.org.uk/11/3/beer.html >

BENJAMIN, W. (1999) The Arcades Project. Cambridge, Massachusetts & London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
BENJAMIN , W. (1999)拱廊项目。马萨诸塞州剑桥和伦敦：哈佛大学出版社贝尔纳普出版社。

BRADSHAW, P. (2006) 'And now for some snuff comedy�', The Guardian, G2, 24 October, pp.28-29.
BRADSHAW , P. (2006)“现在来一些鼻烟喜剧”， 《卫报》 ， G2，10月 24 日，第 28-29 页。

BURROWS, R. and Ellison, N. (2004) 'Sorting Places Out? Towards a Social Politics of Neighbourhood Informatisation' Information, Communication and Society, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 321-336.
BURROWS , R. 和 Ellison, N. (2004)“排序位置？迈向邻里信息化的社会政治《信息、传播与社会》 ，卷。 7、没有。 3，第 321-336 页。

BURROWS, R. and Gane, N. (2006) 'Geodemographics, Software and Class' Sociology, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 793-812.
BURROWS , R. 和 Gane, N. (2006)“地理人口统计学、软件和阶级”社会学，卷。 40，没有。 5，第 793-812 页。

COHN, D. (2005) 'Bands Embrace Social Networking', Wired News, 18 May, <http://www.wired.com/news/culture/1,67545-0.html>(7 December 2006).
COHN , D. (2005)“乐队拥抱社交网络”， 《连线新闻》 ，5 月 18 日，< http://www.wired.com/news/culture/1,67545-0.html >（2006 年 12 月 7 日）。

FEATHERSTONE, M. (1998) 'The Fl�neur, the City and Virtual Public Life' Urban Studies, vol. 35, no. 5-6, pp. 909-925.
FEATHERSTONE , M. (1998)“流浪者、城市和虚拟公共生活”城市研究，卷。 35，没有。 5-6，第 909-925 页。

GANE, N. (2006) 'Speed Up or Slow Down? Social theory in the information age' Information, Communication & Society, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 20-38.
GANE , N. (2006)“加速还是减速？信息时代的社会理论'信息、传播与社会，卷。 9、不。 1，第 20-38 页。

GOLDER, S., Wilkinson, D. & Huberman, B. (n.d.) 'Rhythms of social interaction: messaging within a massive online network', Cornell University Library, <http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.CY/0611137>(15 March 2007).
GOLDER , S.、Wilkinson, D. 和 Huberman, B. (nd)“社交互动的节奏：大型在线网络中的消息传递”，康奈尔大学图书馆，< http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.CY /0611137 >（2007 年 3 月 15 日）。

HARDEY, M. and Burrows, R. (2008) 'Cartographies of Knowing Capitalism and the Changing Jurisdiction of Empirical Sociology' in N. Fielding, R.M. Lee and G. Blank (eds) Handbook of Internet and Online Research Methods London: Sage.
HARDEY , M. 和 Burrows, R. (2008)“了解资本主义和经验社会学不断变化的管辖权的制图”，载于 N. Fielding、RM Lee 和 G. Blank（编辑） 《互联网和在线研究方法手册》伦敦：Sage。

HAYLES, N.K. (2005) My Mother Was A Computer: Digital Subjects and Literary Texts. Chicago and London: The Chicago University Press.
海尔斯，NK (2005)我的母亲是一台计算机：数字主题和文学文本。芝加哥和伦敦：芝加哥大学出版社。

JENKINS, H., Clinton, K., Purushotma, R., Robinson, A. J., & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. MacArthur Foundation. Available at <http://www.digitallearning.macfound.org/>
JENKINS , H.、Clinton, K.、Purushotma, R.、Robinson, AJ 和 Weigel, M. (2006)。面对参与文化的挑战：21世纪的媒体教育。麦克阿瑟基金会。位于 < http://www.digitallearning.macfound.org/ >

JONES, H. and Soltren, J.H. (2005) 'Facebook: Threats to Privacy', Project MAC: MIT Project on Mathematics and Computing, http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/6.805/student-papers/fall05-papers/facebook.pdf (16 March 2007).
JONES , H. 和 Soltren, JH (2005)“Facebook：隐私威胁”， MAC 项目：麻省理工学院数学与计算项目，http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/6.805/student-papers/fall05 -papers/facebook.pdf（2007 年 3 月 16 日）。

KEEN, A. (2007) The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet is Killing Our Culture. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
KEEN , A. (2007)对业余爱好者的崇拜：当今的互联网如何扼杀我们的文化。伦敦：尼古拉斯·布雷利出版社。

KORICA, P., Maurer, H., and Schinagl, W. (2006) 'The Growing Importance of e-Communities on the Web', Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference on Web Based Communities, San Sebasitan, Spain.
KORICA , P.、Maurer, H. 和 Schinagl, W. (2006)“网络上电子社区日益增长的重要性”， IADIS 国际网络社区会议记录，西班牙圣塞巴斯蒂安。

LASH, S. (2002) Critique of Information. London: Sage.
LASH , S. (2002)信息批判。伦敦：圣人。

LASH, S. (2006) 'Dialectic of Information? A response to Taylor' Information, Communication & Society, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 572-581.
LASH , S. (2006)“信息辩证法？”对泰勒《信息、传播与社会》的回应，卷。 9、不。 5，第 572-581 页。

LASH, S. & Lury, C. (2007) Global Culture Industry: The Mediation of Things. Cambridge: Polity.
LASH , S. 和 Lury, C. (2007)全球文化产业：事物的中介。剑桥：政治。

LATOUR, B., (2005) Reassembling the Social, Oxford, Clarendon,
LATOUR , B., (2005)重新组装社会，牛津，克拉伦登，

LENHART, A. & Madden, M. (2005). 'Teen Content Creators and Consumers', Pew Internet & Amercian Life Project, <http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Teens_Content_Creation.pdf>(12 December 2006)
伦哈特，A. 和马登，M. (2005)。 “青少年内容创作者和消费者”，皮尤互联网与美国生活项目，< http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Teens_Content_Creation.pdf >（2006 年 12 月 12 日）

LERNER, R.M. (2006) 'At the Forge: Creating Mashups', Linux Journal, Issue 47, July.
LERNER ，RM (2006)“At the Forge：创建混搭”， Linux Journal ，第 47 期，7 月。

LUNENFELD, P. (2000) Snap to Grid, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
LUNENFELD , P. (2000) Snap to Grid ，麻省理工学院出版社，剑桥，马萨诸塞州。

MANESS, J.M. (2006) 'Library 2.0 Theory: Web 2.0 and its implications for Libraries', Webology, vol. 3, no. 2, <http://www.webology.ir/2006/v3n2/a25.html>
MANESS , JM (2006)“图书馆 2.0 理论：Web 2.0 及其对图书馆的影响”， Webology ，卷。 3、没有。 2、< http://www.webology.ir/2006/v3n2/a25.html >

MARKS, P. (2006) 'Pentagon sets sights on social networking websites', NewScientist.com, 9 June, <http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg19025556.200&print=ture>(7 December 2006).
MARKS , P. (2006)“五角大楼着眼于社交网站”， NewScientist.com ，6 月 9 日，< http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg19025556.200&print=ture >(7 2006 年 12 月）。

MCLUHAN, M. (1997) Marshall McLuhan Essays: Media Research, Technology, Art,
MCLUHAN , M. (1997)马歇尔·麦克卢汉散文：媒体研究、技术、艺术、

Communication, ed. M. A. Moos, G & B Arts International, Amsterdam
通讯，编辑。 MA Moos，G & B 艺术国际，阿姆斯特丹

NOGUCHI, Y. (2006) 'In Teens' Web World, MySpace Is So Last Year', Washington Post, October 29, <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/28/AR2006102800803_pf.html> (12 December 2006).
NOGUCHI , Y. (2006) “在青少年的网络世界中，MySpace 去年如此”， 《华盛顿邮报》 ，10 月 29 日，< http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10 /28/AR2006102800803_pf.html >（2006 年 12 月 12 日）。

O'REILLY, T. (2005) 'What is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software', O'Reilly, <http://oreillynet.com/1pt/a/6228> (7 December 2006).
O'REILLY , T. (2005)“什么是 Web 2.0：下一代软件的设计模式和业务模型”，O'Reilly，< http://oreillynet.com/1pt/a/6228 > (7 2006 年 12 月）。

PICKSTONE, J., (2000) Ways of Knowing. Manchester, Manchester University Press.
PICKSTONE , J., (2000)认识方式。曼彻斯特，曼彻斯特大学出版社。

ROBINSON, J. (2006) 'Mister Space Man', Observer Music Monthly, December 2006, p.20.
ROBINSON , J. (2006)“太空人先生”，观察家音乐月刊，2006 年 12 月，第 20 页。

SAVAGE, M. and Burrows, R. (2007) 'The Coming Crisis of Empirical Sociology', Sociology, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 885-899.
SAVAGE , M. 和 Burrows, R. (2007)“经验社会学即将到来的危机”，社会学，卷。 41、没有。 6，第 885-899 页。

SESSUMS, C.D. (2006) 'Teenagers and social networking: "MySpace is so Last Year"', 29 October, <http://elgg.net/csessums/weblog/136334.html>(7 December 2006).
SESSUMS ，CD (2006)“青少年和社交网络：“MySpace 去年如此”，10 月 29 日，< http://elgg.net/csessums/weblog/136334.html >（2006 年 12 月 7 日）。

SHIELDS, R. (2006) 'Fl�nerie for Cyborgs' Theory, Culture & Society, vol. 23, no. 7-8, pp. 209-220.
SHIELDS , R. (2006) ' Fl�nerie for Cyborgs'理论、文化与社会，卷。 23、没有。 7-8，第 209-220 页。

SUNA, T., Hardey, M., Huhtinen, J., Hiltunen, Y., Kaski, K. Heikkonen, J. and Ala-Korpela, M. (2006) 'Self-Organising Map Approach to Individual Profiles: Age, Sex and Culture in Internet Dating' Sociological Research Online, vol. 11, no. 1, <http://www.socresonline.org.uk/11/1/suna.html>
SUNA , T.、Hardey, M.、Huhtinen, J.、Hiltunen, Y.、Kaski, K. Heikkonen, J. 和 Ala-Korpela, M. (2006)“个人资料的自组织映射方法：年龄、网络约会中的性与文化'社会学研究在线，卷。 11、没有。 1、< http://www.socresonline.org.uk/11/1/suna.html >

TAYLOR, T.D. (2001) Strange Sounds: Music, Technology & Culture. New York & London: Routledge.
泰勒，TD (2001)奇怪的声音：音乐、技术与文化。纽约和伦敦：劳特利奇。

TH�BERGE, P. (1997) Any Sound Your Can Imagine: Making music/consuming technology. Hanover & London: Wesleyan University Press.
TH�BERGE , P. (1997)任何你能想象的声音：制作音乐/消费技术。汉诺威和伦敦：卫斯理大学出版社。

THRIFT, N. (2005) Knowing Capitalism, London, Sage
THRIFT , N. (2005) 《认识资本主义》 ，伦敦，Sage

URRY, (2003) Global Complexity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
URRY ，（2003）全球复杂性。剑桥：政治出版社。

WELLMAN, B. (2001) Physical place and cyberplace: The rise of personalizised networking. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 227-252.
WELLMAN , B. (2001) 物理场所和网络场所：个性化网络的兴起。国际城市与区域研究杂志，卷。 25、没有。 2，第 227-252 页。

WELLMAN, B. and Haythornthwaite, C. (eds) (2002) The Internet in Everyday Life Oxford: Blackwell.
WELLMAN , B. 和 Haythornthwaite, C.（编）（2002） 《日常生活中的互联网》牛津：Blackwell。

VIRILIO, P. (1986) Speed and Politics, Semiotext(e), New York.
VIRILIO , P. (1986)速度与政治，Semiotext(e)，纽约。

VIRILIO, P. (2000) The Information Bomb, Verso, London.

© Sociological Research Online, 1996-2024