With the submission deadline for AOIR 7.0 approaching (Feb 1), I'm seeking colleagues to join a proposed panel on "Critical Perspectives on Web 2.0". A *draft* panel description is posted below, trying to fit with the conference theme of addressing "the (playful) blurring of boundaries online." Please e-mail me off-list if interested at michael.zimmer@nyu.edu. Will need a 250-500 word paper abstract prior to deadline. Thanks! -michael. ----- Michael T. Zimmer Doctoral Candidate, Culture and Communication, New York University Student Fellow, Information Law Institute, NYU Law School e: michael.zimmer@nyu.edu w: http://michaelzimmer.org Draft panel proposal: Critical Perspectives on Web 2.0 Web 2.0 represents a (playful) blurring of the boundaries between Web users and producers, consumption and participation, authority and amateurism, play and work, data and the network, reality and virtuality. The rhetoric surrounding Web 2.0 infrastructures presents certain cultural claims about media, identity, and technology. It suggests that everyone can and should use new Internet technologies to organize and share information, to interact within communities, and to express oneself. It promises to empower creativity, to democratize media production, and to celebrate the individual while also relishing the power of collaboration and social networks. Websites such as Flickr, Wikipedia, del.icio.us, MySpace, and YouTube are all part of this second-generation Internet phenomenon, which has spurred a variety of new services and communities – and venture capitalist dollars. But Web 2.0 also embodies a set of unintended consequences, including the increased flow of personal information across networks, the diffusion of one’s identity across fractured spaces, the emergence of powerful tools for peer surveillance, and the fear of increased corporatization of online social and collaborative spaces and outputs. In Technopoly, Neil Postman warned that we tend to be “surrounded by the wondrous effects of machines and are encouraged to ignore the ideas embedded in them. Which means we become blind to the ideological meaning of our technologies” (1992, p. 94). As the power and ubiquity of the Web 2.0 infrastructure rises, it becomes increasingly difficult for users to recognize its externalities, and easier to take the design of such tools simply “at interface value” (Turkle, 1995, p. 103). Heeding Postman and Turkle’s warnings, this panel will work to remove the blinders of the unintended consequences of Web 2.0’s (playful) blurring of boundaries and critically explore the social, political, and ethical dimensions of Web 2.0.