“Web 2.0: Community as Commodity?” by Diane P. Michelfelder is the 13th chapter of The Good Life in a Technological Age (2012), a collection of essays critiquing the impact of technology on society. Michelfelder unearths the merits and demerits of the social Web designated as Web 2.0. The good or bad of this system is a moral poser for many thinkers on it. Contrary to providing a clear answer at the end of the debate Michelfelder concludes that this is still an ongoing debate and at the same time warns that there is no room for categorical statements of moral rectitude here. In short, this question cannot be treated in the manner of an Armageddon which settles in the favour of one or other.
Between the introductory part and the concluding part the whole argument is structured into two unique sections, each examining a vivid aspect of the individual self under the sway of social networking. The first of these examines the dialectic of community sense against the threat of commodification that seems inevitable. The second of the two core sections discusses at length the redeeming qualities of online gaming that negate the hypothesis of moral surrender due to social networking. On the whole the ruling criterion is that online communication settings are not necessarily a parading of superficial identities, or self-deceptive for that matter.
The argument begins in the very introduction by citing the mind-boggling figures of Facebook loyalists as early as July 2010 given by the founder Mark Zuckerberg (Michelfelder 203). The communications researcher Darin Barney and philosopher Albert Borgmann had already highlighted the moral challenges implicit in online communications in their 2004 work. The points surfacing in their arguments are the linking of identities with marketing potential which has individuals either as advertisers or as game for the market, and also, the taking for granted of the virtual selves or allowing personal data (a synonym for privacy) to be controlled by the virtual monopoly. This is seen as leading to the lowering of the individual index and hence undermining of the notion of community. Further, such sites determine existence to the extent that Facebook use, for one, becomes the benchmark of sociability. Status updates too are more in the manner of selling than revealing oneself.
Thus one would presume that the onset of the commodification process is the end of self-identity online. But here there is a very interesting contradiction to this hypothesis. Massively Multiplayer Online Games (MMOG) like World of Warcraft (WoW) that engage a huge section of the world population have the quality of honing community skills by involving players in challenging moral situations. The Virtual World being Azeroth and Alliance and Horde the combatants require the players to choose one position which makes a clear demand on one’s ethical standing. This fosters responsibility to the community and is a vigorous ethical exercise. Social commentators like Adam Ruch and Miguel Sicart commend the ethically fortifying potential of this game where the individual is called upon to operate above the rules of the game (Michelfelder 209)
Works Cited
Borgmann, Albert. “Is the Internet the Solution to the Problem of Community?” Community in the Digital Age: Philosophy and Practice, Ed. Feenberg, Andrew and Barney, Darin. Lanham: Roman and Littlefield, 2004. Print.
Michelfelder, Diane P. “Web 2.0: Community as Commodity?” The Good Life in a Technological Age, ED. Brey, Adam et al. London: Routledge, 2012. Print.
