Web 2.0- The disadvantages

The bursting of the dot-com bubble in early 2000 left many sites scathed. However, there were a few websites that did come out unharmed from the carnage. Web 2.0 is the term used to describe these sites. When experts studied the features these sites, they realized that most of these sites had a lot in common. For instance, their focus was always on the user. Similarly, these sites also gave importance to the inputs that they were able to gain from the users and used the same in enhancing the functionality of the site.

So, when the time came for a resurrection, a large number of webmasters decided to apply Web 2.0 technologies while building the skeleton of their website. Thus, Web 2.0 is quickly climbing the popularity charts when it comes to websites and webmasters.

At the same time, we are also witnessing a surge in Web 2.0 spin offs. Take for instance wikis and blogs. The virtual world is literally dotted with thousands of blogs and wikis.  The major factor that has given a fillip to the popularity of Web 2.0 happens to be its ability to become ‘a platform for contributing content’. In the pre Web 2.0 era, visitors would visit a website, scan the content pasted therein, and then just log off. In other words, the visitor was a mere spectator who could not put forth his own opinions and suggestions. But, when Web 2.0 came along, the virtual landscape underwent a tremendous change. For instance, use of the wiki software allows a website visitor to add, delete or edit the content of a site. Similarly, readers of a blog have the freedom to paste their comments and opinions about a particular piece of writing on the blog itself.

In short, there are many advantages associated with Web 2.0. However, every coin has two sides and Web 2.0 is no exception.

Well, a major disadvantage associated with Web 2.0 is that the websites become vulnerable to vandalism. Since, anyone can edit the content of a Web 2.0 site, it is possible for a person to purposely damage or destroy the content of a website. Hence, most experts stress upon the use of wiki software that allows one to store all the versions of a particular page. This ensures that you do not lose out on valuable information when someone vandalizes your site. The software should also allow you to retrieve the previous content or information.

When one talks about vandalism, the case of ‘John Seigenthaler Sr.’ immediately comes up in one’s mind. Well, a false biography of Seigenthaler Sr. was put up in Wikipedia. The biography read, “John Seigenthaler Sr. was the assistant to Attorney General Robert Kennedy in the early 1960's. For a brief time, he was thought to have been directly involved in the Kennedy assassinations of both John, and his brother, Bobby. Nothing was ever proven."  Now, Seigenthaler Sr did work as an assistant to Robert Kennedy, but he was never involved in the assassination of the other two Kennedy brothers.

This kind of vandalism can cause irreparable damage to a person’s reputation. In the words of Seigenthaler Sr himself, “I had heard for weeks from teachers, journalists and historians about "the wonderful world of Wikipedia," where millions of people worldwide visit daily for quick reference "facts," composed and posted by people with no special expertise or knowledge — and sometimes by people with malice.”

The other disadvantage associated with Web 2.0 is that it offers anonymity to the person who edits the content. This lacuna can be exploited by a person who wants to publish some malicious content, just as it happened in the case of Seigenthaler Sr.

Similarly, Web 2.0 spin-offs such as wikis and blogs are also plagued by copyright issues. Many a times, it has been noticed that copyrighted material finds its way on to wiki-based encyclopedias. Since, such sites do not have a clear demarcation regarding authority over articles, the blame cannot be pinned down on a single person.  Thus, the culprits are able to go scot-free.

Many experts also doubt the credibility of the information that is available on wikis and blogs. Since any Tom, Dick, Harry can edit a wiki or start a blog, the possibility of incorrect information creeping into the virtual world can never be ruled out.

Web 2.0 also has to address the issues of privacy. Take the example of YouTube. It allows any person to upload a video. But what if the video recording was done without the knowledge of the person who is being shown in the video? Thus, many experts believe that Web 2.0 might put the privacy of a person at stake.

So, though Web 2.0 is gaining enormous popularity, it still contains major flaws and disadvantages that need to be ironed out in order to make it really effective.