| ||||||||||||||||||
Nardi and O'Day first draw on the works of prominent technology authors--such as Langdon Winner, Jacques Ellul, Nicholas Negroponte, and Clifford Stoll--examining various perspectives on technology design. Next, they define information ecology as "a system of people, practices, values, and technologies in a particular local environment." The book then urges readers to become involved in information ecologies and explains how to do so. Several case studies highlight successful information ecologies: a library setting, which emphasizes diversity of human personalities and technical resources without competition; Longview Elementary School in Phoenix, where students and educators collaborate to establish guidelines for responsible use of a virtual community called Pueblo; and a digital photography class, where the focus is on the value of the content being created rather than the sophisticated tools needed to perform the task of creation. A slim but inspiring book, Information Ecologies opens our eyes to the technology we use daily and prompts us to question how it could be better used or designed to meet our goals. --Cristina Vaamonde
"[A] new and refreshing perspective on our technologically dependent society.... Information Ecologies is an antidote to our current infection: our unquestioning acceptance of, and dependence upon, technology. Nardi and O'Day demonstrate how technology can have a more humane face when handled properly and integrated into a social environment where the human factor isn't ignored." David Howell, Daily Telegraph
--This text refers to the Paperback edition.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
The authors do a very good job of summarizing the various "framing conversations" and "metaphors" that have been used to talk about technology and as the basis for analyzing the impact of technological change. They cite many books that I have read and enjoyed as thought-provoking discussions of technology and its role in society (Being Digital, Silicon Snake Oil, The Gutenberg Elegies, Technopoly, Life on the Screen) and use them to bolster their arguments in ways that will probably encourage others to seek out those books and read them (in fact I am inspired to delve into "ancient history" and read some of the older, seminal works the authors cite).
The writing style of the book is very clear and cordial but every time I felt I was being led through interesting discourse to a logical conclusion or culminating POINT I would exit a paragraph or chapter feeling somehow that there was no "there" there.
Interesting questions were raised and a persuasive thesis was put forward concerning why the old ways of thinking about technology should be superceded by their metaphor of "information ecology". The authors note (pg. 70) that "It is common to leap ahead to 'how' questions when we think about technology. [...] It is less common - but crucially important - to ask a full range of "why questions as well [...]" But at the end of the first section I felt *all* I had was a framework of questions, and no discussion of how the answers define an information ecology. The authors "conclusion" (page 74) was apparently that the whole matter is a "complex business" and "change can become confusing and overwhelming" but "talk" and "experiments" and "local settings" are the answer.
To which I heaved a sigh of "HUH?" and moved on to part 2 where I was promised that we would "look in detail at specific information ecologies ... [and] see examples that show diversity, coevolution, keystone species, and the application of values". OK! I was ready for some solid field work and logical analysis of the data to substantiate their new way of examining technology. What did I find? Redundant, boring, embarrassing and CONFUSING transcripts of interactions that definitely lost something in the translation. I have personal and extensive experience in environments similar to those described in chapters 7 (Librarians: a keystone species) and 9 (Cultivating Gardeners: the importance of homegrown expertise) and I couldn't tell how the material presented was supposed to illustrate their points! This is not to say that I didn't find much of the discussion interesting as a point of departure for thinking about those situations - but the transcripts of interviews were a distraction and waste of time. They should have been relegated to footnotes (or left out entirely). By the time I got to Chapter 10 and had to read interviews that were filled with "Yeah. And it's weird. I thought it was weird how you can get a picture into the computer" ... well, ya know it was, like, gag me with a spoon, ya know?
The last chapter was primarily a rehash of dozens of articles praising the Internet "as a riveting global phenomenon with important implications for local information ecologies". They state that "Information ecologies are local habitations with recognizable participants and practices" but nothing in the previous 184 pages had demonstrated that to me! I felt as if Chapter 13 had been tacked on to fill the book out to a reasonable length.
In spite of it all, I give the book 3 stars (I'd give it 2 1/2 if I could) because of the first section and the interesting observations that are scattered in the second section. The concluding paragraph on the last page quotes Annie Dillard - "we need to call our attention to what passes before our eyes". This book DOES do that - but I had hoped for so much more.
I found some of their arguments against technological advances to be weak in some areas. For example, they discuss the moral ramifications of cloning, and whether or not we should allow cloning of human beings, or even investigate the possibility, "just because we can." They also quoted J. Robert Oppenheimer, father of the hydrogen bomb, about his team's desire to move forward and build the bomb simply because they had proved in theory that it was possible. What to do with the bomb would be someone else's decision. I found the authors' arguments to be ineffective in that these situations represent extreme positions that most people could agree with. However, major advancements in science, medicine, mathematics and other fields have been achieved by individuals simply trying to "push the envelope." Indeed, the original hacker community was not a group of individuals trying to break into secure servers, they were programmers obsessed with perfection in programming techniques, trying to find the most efficient way to accomplish a task with the least amount of code. I wonder what side the authors would take in George Mallory's position of climbing Mt. Everest simply "because it's there." What would a "critical friend" of Mallory's say to him about his motivation?
I was a bit disturbed by their portrayal of Nicholas Negroponte as a someone who blindly accepts and promotes technology and it's inevitable place in our future, with no consideration of the consequences. They chide him for the technology-driven Utopia he describes in his book "Being Digital", with its technology that lacks any sense of social meaning or integration into society. Their portrayal fell just short of comparing Negroponte to Victor Frankenstein.
I felt their portrayal of Negroponte on one end of the scale and Cliff Stoll on the other was inaccurate. Though their opinions differ, they hardly represent the extreme ends of the spectrum. I suspect the authors' motivation for choosing these two individuals was their relative fame in the online community.
The authors conducted a number of impressive case studies that dominate the second half of the book. I found these chapters to be much more enjoyable and informative than the earlier chapters that attempt to strengthen their arguments. Their selection of librarians as a "keystone species" in the information ecology was insightful. I found their arguments for this selection as effective, but it too fell short. Rather than focusing simply on the end user, they could have also argued for the use of skilled librarians on the server and design end of the equation. The huge need for librarian skills at the client end highlights the deficiencies at the server and design end of the net.
I have never met an individual who believes that all of society's ills can be solved by throwing technology at it, as Nicholas Negroponte is portrayed in this book. If such a person does exist, this book was written for him or her, as it would be for a true Luddite. Unfortunately, I don't believe either would be swayed effectively by the authors' arguments.
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product).
|
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|