Webster Analytical Report

Web 2.0 Websites Used February 27-March 5

(listed from highest to lowest frequency)
  • Facebook, 375 minutes (6.25 hours)
  • YouTube, 180 minutes (3 hours)
  • Wikipedia, 105 minutes (1.75 hours)
  • cwtv.com, 95 minutes (1.5 hours)
  • Texts From Last Night, 65 minutes (1.08 hours)
  • Managing Knowledge wiki, 65 minutes (1.08 hours)
  • MTV.com, 45 minutes (0.75 hours)
  • Urban Dictionary, 30 minutes (0.50 hours)
  • Perez Hilton, 25 minutes (0.41 hours)
  • Post Secret, 15 minutes (0.25 hours)
  • Inthewabe.wordpress.com, 10 minutes (0.10 hours)

Descriptions of Usage

Facebook is the website that I use the most. Over the course of the week, I racked up about six hours of time spent on Facebook. While I never spent more than 30 minutes at a time on Facebook, my frequent usage of the site added up to a lot more than I expected. I generally use Facebook to check status updates, view pictures, and post comments; my high usage reflects my habitual need for Facebook as it distracts me from completing work.

YouTube is where I listen to new music that I don’t want to buy on iTunes. I usually listen to YouTube music videos while idly surfing the web or while working on assignments. I will occasionally view comic videos on YouTube that have been passed on to me from a friend.

Wikipedia, to me, is just as efficient as the Google search bar. My friends and I use it to look up random information on an almost daily basis. Wikipedia also has a site solely for posting recipes. My use of this site is usually one-side as I never post recipes to the wiki, but I do frequently find good recipes to try-out.

cwtv.com is the online home of the CW Television Network. I use this site to watch TV shows that I have missed on cable during the week. A few of my favorites include Gossip Girl and One Tree Hill. I usually spend one-two day(s) per week on this site.

Texts From Last Night is a ridiculous site that I read when I am in need of some entertainment. The texts are anonymously sent in so nobody is publicly scorned on the site. I, personally, have never sent a text to the site, but nonetheless, I enjoy reading the posts.

Managing Knowledge Wiki is our class wiki. I use the wiki to check and post homework assignments. My (somewhat) high usage this week is from posting “Paper One” to the site. I also read a few of my peers’ papers to see if my paper was on the right track.

MTV.com is where I watch missed shows on cable for the week. A few that I watch include My life as Liz and The Buried Life. I usually only visit this site once per week, if at all.
Urban Dictionary is an online dictionary that defines slang and colloquial jargon. I used this site as a reference for “Paper One.”

Perez Hilton is a blog-site that posts information about celebrities. I don’t normally read Perez Hilton, but this week my roommate showed me a post on the blog. Perez usually makes obnoxious remarks about celebrities, but he maintains a large fan base despite his immature rants.

PostSecret is a blog-site that reveals postcards with secrets written on them. It has become my Sunday ritual to read newly-posted secrets.

Inthewabe.wordpress.com is a site that I stumbled upon while searching for cupcake recipes for my boyfriend’s birthday. It’s a personal blog by a young 21-year old woman who blogs about her interests in fashion and cooking. Ever since, I have become addicted to her charming style of writing, and her endearing tidbits about style and cooking. Not to mention, she derived her blog name from Lewis Carroll’s poem Jabberwocky, a personal favorite of mine.

Conclusions

After analyzing my usage of Web 2.0 technologies, I find that I use these sites to retrieve knowledge and information to fulfill my aesthetic desires. Whether I’m viewing pictures on Facebook, listening to music on YouTube, or searching for recipes on Wikipedia, I am interacting with these sites to acquire non-scholarly information (with the exception of using a few sites for research). I feel that my usage of Web 2.0 technologies is somewhat in sync with my generation. I do use Web 2.0, but I rarely interact with it unless I’m using Facebook or YouTube. Despite me, we are a generation that media multitasks, and we combine our knowledge on the internet.

While comparing digital media technologies to traditional sources, I find that I enjoy traditional sources more fully. I love going to the library to do my research, and I love receiving cards in the mail; there’s something more intimate in these tangible sources. I also find that traditional sources of media are less distracting than digital sources. Digital sources allow users the ability to constantly re-direct their focus. Traditional sources also seem more reliable because they have to endure a strict editing process before they are published. Not that digital information lacks credibility, but it does lose some credibility due to endless collaboration from all users (though, this depends on the site used). I feel that traditional methods are better for obtaining scholarly knowledge, while digital methods are better for obtaining social knowledge.

As far as managing social knowledge, I feel that digital technologies have mastered a system for organizing this information. Blogs and social networking sites provide digital users a platform to store and share their knowledge and information. This information is easily accessible to other users, and it is editable. By editable, I mean that any user can augment the information by posting comments or adding suggestions. As I mentioned earlier, we are a generation that “needs” media so we have learned to depend on it. We can receive information in the traditional manner, but we choose digital technologies because they have more interactive abilities. Not only this, but the internet is more attractive because everyone is using it; it’s easier to connect with friends on the internet.

Regardless of its appeal, I would like to think that I haven’t been totally sucked in to the digital realm. At the end of the day, I would much rather lay in bed reading a book than stare into that glaring screen.

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License