This is a lengthy comment I wrote on Dave Warlicks blog post. I thought I would add it here and see if I can get some comment.
I wanted to weigh in here because I think it will raise an interesting point of argument when it comes to blog edict. Ewan Macintosh in the podcast from Wes Frayer’s site mentioned that one of the problems he saw in student blogging was this lack of moral judgement when commenting on a peer’s weblog. The students saw it as a chance to be rude or inconsiderate of each other. There is an interesting debate to have here about how exactly we go about setting rules and guidelines for blog comments. What I write on my own site is entirely up to me and therefore what I allow to be posted on my site is also my decision. However, you would hope that professionals would never abuse what should be an environment of trust. The digital native and digital immigrants still need to be guided with some wisdom and values. Oh how I can see an even more increasing need for quality values education as we head toward the future of such technologies….
Moral questions come to mind like…….
1) Is it wrong to use someone’s unprotected wireless?
2) Is downloading a TV show that isn’t available for purchase in your area wrong?
3) Don’t I have a right to constructively criticize someone’s point of view in a podcast or weblog and have it read by all that read the blog?
4) What if I copy and past information off someone’s weblog? Especially if they haven’t copyrighted it?
5) Can I take David Warlick’s opinion, thought or concept and present it as my own presentation at a conference in which I receive financial gain, without giving him credit?
6) Who owns the intellectual property of wikipedia?
Furthermore, we need students to understand the concept of bias and what the particular bias of a piece of writing is. If I have complete control over the content on my weblog, all who read it and perhaps my reference to it need to emphasise the fact that all comments by me and all comments by my readers have gone through a personal bias filter – The Brett Moller bias filter!!
How important it is to communicate this idea to students, especially if we continue to encourage them to participate in these types of conversational technologies.
All these questions I can answer on my own value system, but what if you disagree, what the law disagrees? And like so many areas of technology change what if there is no law that covers these questions?
This got lengthy enough for me to post on my weblog (http://blog.brettmoller.com) – Oh is it wrong for me to promote my weblog on Dave’s site? Especially, considering he has his site setup to auto allow my comments!!!!
Pingback: 2 Cents Worth » Weblogs and Ethics
This is a very important conversation to have. I find myself firmly entrenched in the camp that believes there really is nothing new in Web 2.0. It’s just a natural, even predictable to a degree, evolution of potential that has always been there. I have long contended that the real power of the web lies in its potential to connect people. When people connect and interact with each other great things are possible. Not so great things are possible as well.
So the web is becoming more social. We are witnessing the genesis and growth of communities on a scale never before imagined. The explosive growth of myspace is thus far this phenomenon’s greatest testament.
There seems to be this notion that online societies and communities are somehow less real by virtue of their vituality. It is as if what happens in a virtual space has no relevance to the so called real world. The keyboard and screen are the great mediating/mitigating/aggravating filters through which these societies are evolving. The relative anonymity afforded by these filters brings forth the belief that what happens online is somehow subject to a new set of rules, or no rules at all. A “wild west” mentality abounds.
However, behind those blogs and comments and screens and keyboards are real people. The interactions are real relationships. The societies and communities are real. The things that happen here have real effect and affect. Morals, judgements, values, and even laws that apply in the real world apply here as well.
I don’t have a magic bullet to overcome the “wild west” mentality, but I think it looks quite a bit like the same bullet we would use in the real world.
Matthew
Ok. I have a question. In teaching preservice teachers to blog, I have encouraged them to search edubloggers… find something that resonates… blog about it. Then go back and leave a comment letting the edublogger know they found it interesting and why and that they have added to their thoughts over on the student’s blog. I always have them leave their blog address.
Is this breaking blog Etiquette in someway? I am having them do it so that it will be an indication to the edublogger that this novice would love for them to visit their blog and leave a comment. Because truth is… until they get a comment– they are not excited or convinced.
In the meantime, is there a Web 2.0 version of Emily Post out there that can keep me from offending bloggers in my exuberance to get teachers using these tools– so they in turn can embed them in their teaching.
Sheyl,
I think the purpose of this post was the fact that I don’t think there is a set of rules of etiquette for blogs. I personally don’t think you are encouraging your students to do anything wrong. I think it is great that you encourage them to engage in these technologies. I just put the questions out there, as I believe it won’t be long until we will need some sort of guidlines.
Well done on the great work. More pre-service teachers need to be engaging in these technologies, so our next generation of teachers are ready to engage their classes in new and exciting ways.
Very interesting. Does anyone know of a discussion going on about this? Google groups? Should we start one?