Magazine wikis are Web 3.0

Yesterday, Dave Winer outlined some suggestions (hopes) for the next step in the evolution of the web, somewhat related to the long-envisioned “semantic web or Web 3.0” — and what Dave calls for discussion sake, Web 3.0. Building on the read-write-share, grassroots, “amateur,” nature of what has been lumped together and called Web 2.0, Dave “hopes” for a day when “professional media” fully embraces, “the new media, no longer see it as a threat to their continued employment. See amateur public writing, the former audience who is no longer silent, as sources who can get attention for their ideas without going through an intermediary.”

MediaPost.com today has an article about magazines launching topical wikis. Like the steady adoption of blogging by traditional media, this is another example of the blending of “corporate media” and “personal media” into something we’ll one day call, well, whatever it is we will call the web when we stop putting numbers on it.

Ironically, I do not recommend that marketers or magazine people read the MediaPost.com article. Indeed, I have long said that if you want to understand wikis, the last thing you should do is read about them. For example, I spend a big chunk of each week tending a large-scale wiki and I have absolutely no idea what the following sentence from the article means: “The social invitation to create knowledge offers a form of audience interaction that may even be more engaging than social networks, where people create profiles but don’t necessarily interact.”

I’ll be blogging a great deal more on this topic in coming months.

Disclosure: A wiki I host, SmallBusiness.com runs on a beta-version of Web 3.0. (Note for the non-geek: while I do host that wiki, the suggestion that Web 3.0 is a release version of software is a joke.)

  • http://dannyayers.com Danny

    Ok, maybe the boom of Web 3.0 will be the reflection of traditional media on the web, in a similar fashion to the boom of Web 1.0 was largely traditional commerce extended to the web. But the Semantic Web idea is about getting *data* on the web (such as the stuff already in DBs as well as the material often hidden in HTML documents) in a standard, linkable, reusable form. Check Tim Berners-Lee’s short video.

    While a new world of democratised journalism does seem very desirable and is probably inevitable, there are broader changes afoot.

  • Rex Hammock

    Danny, I linked to the NY Times story and said “somewhat related to” because I agree with your point that the concept of the “semantic web” is broader than the issue of corporate and personal media learning to work with one another. Like my steadfast attempt to stay away from the term Web 2.0 (when something can mean anything, it means nothing, I’ve always said), I will likely steer clear of using the term Web 3.0 as well.