User:Marie Wocher/Oct 3

The world is highly determined by New Media. I as a designer am interested in how we exchange and organize knowledge on the web. Over the last few years, I have focussed my research on Web 2.0. To be more precise I am interested in the way users of Web 2.0 act in popular structures, such as Wikipedia, Facebook and Google. In my theoretical work, I try to find out how the web effects our life and how we express our feelings. Recurring questions and topics are if the Web mirrors our own expectations or if it is a preexisting set of technologies that we simply follow and adapt, what truth and lie means in the digital world and the question of identity/authenticity.

Previous projects that are dealing with these issues are for example Vincent, my Graduation project, where I ask the Question how do we read on the internet and is it possible to design a printed publication that offers the same kind of non-hierachial experience as browsing through an internet website? I researched our reading behavior at the Web, by analyzing peoples web-browser histories. The source I chose for showing my research is the novel Vincent by Joey Goebel. Using the text of this book, I designed two A4 printed publications of the same book, entitled Vincent I and Vincent II. I restructured the Text of the novel and added a marginal column that consists of references that help the reader to navigate through the structure of the book. All Characters in the book are identified as a »Link«, that the reader can look up by turning to the indicated page. What is the »click« on a web page is in my version of Vincent, a system of footnotes, cross-links and different paper choices that navigates the reader through The book. The difference between the two Versions is my choice of structure and accompanying referential internet source. Vincent I is based on Google and Wikipedia. It is an archive. I restructured all of the text of the book based on the main characters of the book, gathering all the passages from each character grouping them together. From there you are invited to «click» on different links to go deeper into the experience of the book, finally ending up in Google and Wikipedia pages that results from searching selected keywords of tags within the text. Vincent II on the other hand uses Twitter as inspiration. Twitter being a metaphor for chronological structure, I restructured the text of the book in chronological order, offering the reader links to related Twitter posts via related hash-tag keywords. I was interested if I can offer the same kind of dynamic experience to a generation of readers used to Google and Wikipedia, but in reading printed books. Like on the internet I don't offer my reader anything more than choices, in my specific case visual choices. The reader of the book has the possibility to become his or her own editor, make the decision of how he or she wants to read the book, by him or herself. The reader can still read the novel as it was Joey Goebel's intention, but he or she can also read broader, start reading a chapter, browsing to a highlighted name and go on reading all information of the character and than reading further external links in Wikipedia or Twitter. There is even a link backwards that functions as a virtual »back button« should you get lost and want to find your way back.

Another project, that is dealing with the boundaries of Web 2.0 is the Libya-Project. For this project I have chosen Google as the medium upon which I formulated questions, such as „How does Google help me to form an opinion?“ and „Where are the borders of Google?“ In depth, I concerned myself with the topic oft he NATO operation in Libya. I decided to choose this issue, because I realized that I faced some difficulties when it came to terms of forming a clear opinion and taking an own position concerning the current NATO operation in Libya. Therefore, I asked myself whether or not Google would help me to find a personal opinion on this subject. I developed a questionnaire, which consists of skill questions as well as of matters of conscience. Those ideas resulted in a book, which is divided into three parts. The first part of the book consists of questions, such as “When did the military operation in Libya started? How long does this NATO operation will take? Which nations take part in this operation? How are the citizens of Libya called? Where is Libya located?” - questions which can be easily answered by using Google and whose answers are often taken for granted due to their fact-based nature. No one needs to worry when asking awkward questions, which everybody would expect one to know, since they are considered as general knowledge. Google does not recognize shame. It is all about “fact check” – catching up on information – a habit which has taken greater significance since the Internet is almost always available. It has become increasingly important to be “up to date” and to possess knowledge.

Part two concentrates on questions where it is possible to find an answer, but where one must be aware of the fact that this answer might only be one out of many. Questions, such as “Why do NATO operations always take longer than thought in the first place? or Is libyan society able to build a democratic state after Gaddafi is removed... I realized that the opinion people develop for a certain topic depends widely on the scope of information Google provides. To a certain degree, Google dictates the way people think about a topic, due to the fact that Google simply reproduces or collects different press articles, blogs, etc. However, I did not find a sufficient response to every question. Therefore, I had to be satisfied with the answers Google proposes.

The final third part consists of questions which can not be answered by using Google, such as “What is it like to lose a person? What is it like to lose someone for the ‘good cause’? Will it be easier to cope with the death of people when they sacrificed themselves for the good cause? Was it right to invade Libya? Questions which are so personal that in the end everyone has to find answers on their own.

The three parts of the book and its content illustrate the borders of the Internet. What is the difference between facts and opinion? By using Google you acquire factual knowledge, true or not but an opinion (or a moral valuation) will never be formed beause you do not have answers to all questions you have.

The question of truth and untruth is also a main question in the work Moira Moira, where I asked the question if it is possible to criticize Wikipedia in it’s own structure. Which rules the wikipedians have to adherence? What makes an article enzyclopedia-worthy? What are the rules for neutrality and references inside Wikipedia? How democratically is the established truth? Is there space for critique? Our intention was to demonstrate that it is possible to disperse an own vision on Wikipedia.

We decided to take pictures of public places in Nijmegen that have a Wikipedia-article. In these pictures you can see a poster that we were hanging before taking the picture. After we uploaded the pictures on Wikipedia, all computers of ArtEZ Arnhem, Enschede and Zwolle where blocked for one year by a Wikipedian, called MoiraMoira. Eventually, there was one person reasonable for the exclusion of 3800 students. Who was MoiraMoira? She is Wikipedia-moderator, what comprises that she can approve and advert the announcement of new Wikipedia articles. The condition to become moderator is as following: you have to attend more than 300 articles. »MoiraMoira - Verzamelde Bewerkingen« (2008) is a collection of MoiraMoira’s first 300 adaptions that gives her the right to cause about right and wrong inside Wikipedia.

The fascination for the structure of Wikipedia and Knowledge exchange in general lead into two recent projects this year:

Whitney/Postmodernism/Libyan Civil War

Whitney/Postmodernism/Libyan Civil War is an installation that consist of three different animations, each shown on a separate screen. The screen of each animation is split into two and shows all edits being made on the same Wikipedia page on two different days. The WIkipedia pages I chose are the pages of Whitney Houston, Libyan civil war and Postmodernism. I compared the Libya civil war page on the day the NATO intervened (03-18-11) with the 11th of february 2012, the day Whitney Houston died. The second animation shows all edits of the Whitney Houston page on the day she died and the day, I run the script, that was the 29th of march 2012 (ideally it would be the current day). The amount of edits varies strongly in these two animations. The third animation (Postmodernism page) compares the same days like the Whitney Houston animation. This is a page that is not dependent on current events and media attention. The amount of changes are on both days almost the same. All edits are shown as black text on white background. Each entry is seen as long as a new edit was made. 24 hours has been compressed to 15 minutes, whereas the proportions are correct. I saved all edits from a script that can scrape all edits that have been made on one particular wikipedia page in one day. For this project I was interested in the question "How do we remember?" And rather I was interested in the moment, when the mass media lose interest to a topic and therefor the public attention is stagnating and a topic gets no longer any attention anymore. I decided to research this phenomenon within the structure of Wikipedia. When a topic is particular current and gets a lot of media attention, the activity on Wikipedia clearly increase what means that the edits of a page will increase. But after a while the amount of edits on a Wikipedia page will fall to a lower level again.


The Train of Knowledge App

The Train of Knowledge App is a Social Network for train passengers allowing people to get in touch with other people traveling on the same train. Users can register their profession or specify various fields of interest and search for interesting people to share the journey with. The integrated chat function enables the user to get into first contact. They can suggest what they would like to talk about and let others know what`s on their mind. And if you get along, to meet on the train is only ever a few steps away. For the TP I designed a promoting animation. The animation shows by means of a concrete example how the Train of Knowledge App works. The initial Idea was to make this animation to be able to promote it on Kickstarter to get the App financed by crowd funding. Inspired by Richard Floridas The Rise of the Creative Class and the lectures by Florian Cramer where we discussed the change of the Creative Industry here in The Netherlands, I was interested in how I, as a designer can be part of the Creative Industry by acting within their rules. Furthermore I am interested in systems of knowledge exchange in general and the question if it is possible to get in touch with people you would never meet in your normal life.

In my practical work I try to clarify my research. To find visual answers to the questions I have. I am looking for a visual possibility to make my position clear. So far, I always wanted to show my research and not write about it or say it directly. For me it is important that the reader or visitor gets my point by watching or reading my work.


bibliography