Discussion
Leader:
1. This article
revolves around money and the idea of having a large income, two components
that are arguably among the highest values in our society today.
After reading
this article, do you think companies that are exploring whether to “monetize”
themselves or not, are going to choose a path similar to that of Jimmy Wales,
or the opposite based on the way the author presented the issue?
2. Instead of
lamenting on the fact that Wales is not extremely wealthy, do you think the
author could have turned the story around and presented it in a positive light,
making a point that many good things in this world are not a product of
monetary incentives, Wikipedia being among them? If the author had written in
such a way, would you answer from my question before change or not?
3. In the
article, Wales’s current project, “Wikipedia Zero” is explained, in which the
foundation established partnerships with telecommunications companies to
provide mobile phones preloaded with Wikipedia in developing countries. Do you
think that perhaps this project is oversimplified? Will developing nations know
how to use this technology and information? If “knowledge is power,” do you
think that access to all this information will help or potentially harm
developing nations?
4. With over 20
billion page views and roughly 516 million unique visitors a month, advertisers
are likely to pay very large sums of money for their products to be shown on
Wikipedia pages. Do you think Wikipedia will remain “unmonetized” and ad-free
for much longer despite pressures from big-time advertisers? Why or why not?
Also, if Wikipedia had ads today, do you think it would be any more or less
informative?
5. The author
gives many examples of celebrities Wales has made friends with after his
networking success. What implications might these relationships with
celebrities have for Wikipedia? Is their influence on Wales something to be
concerned about? How might “the community” check and balance these “friendships”?
6. Earlier in
the semester, we read about personal relations mishaps by CEO’s of large
companies including BP, Toyota, and Goldman Sachs. Wales seems to practice good
personal relations as he is very active in the Internet information world,
despite some who claim that he “settled” into this spontaneous role. What
aspects of Wales’ PR management could these CEO’s take notes on, and, if any,
aspects they should veer away from?
7. The author,
Amy Chozick, portrays Jimmy Wales’ in an interesting matter, sometimes even
“catty” with somewhat derogatory references to his wardrobe, quoting and
ex-friend’s opinion of Wales after their falling out, and pointing out the way he
says “literally” like someone with a British accent. Do you thing that the
author intentionally meant to negatively represent Wales?
8. The article
states that Wales argues, “In the long run [the collective ownership model] makes
Wikipedia far more enduring and valuable to society that Facebook or Twitter”
do you believe this statement is true or false? Explain your answer.
No comments:
Post a Comment