Fact factories: Wikipedia and the power to represent

Wikipedia is no longer just another source of knowledge about the world. It is fast becoming a central source, used by other powerful knowledge brokers like Google and Bing to offer authoritative answers to search queries about people, places and things and as information infrastructure for a growing number of Web applications and services. Researchers have found that Wikipedia offers a skewed representation of the world that favours some groups at the expense of others so that representations on the platform have repercussions for the subjects of those representations beyond Wikipedia's domain. It becomes critical in this context to understand how exactly Wikipedia's representations come about, what practices give rise to them and what socio-technical arrangements lead to their expression. This ethnographic study of Wikipedia explores the values, principles and practices that guide what knowledge Wikipedia represents. It follows the foundational principles of Wikipedia in its identity both as an encyclopaedia and a product of the free and open source software and internet freedom rhetoric of the early 2000s. Two case studies are analysed against the backdrop of this ideology, illustrating how different sets of actors battle to extend or reject the boundaries of Wikipedia, and in doing so, affect who are defined as the experts, subjects and revolutionaries of the knowledge that is taken up. The findings of this thesis indicate that Wikipedia's process of decision-making is neither hierarchical nor is it egalitarian; rather, the power to represent on Wikipedia is rhizoid: it happens at the edges rather than in the centre of the network. Instead of everyone having the same power to represent their views on Wikipedia, those who understand how to perform and speak according to Wikipedia's complex technical, symbolic and policy vocabulary tend to prevail over those who possess disciplinary knowledge about the subject being represented. Wikipedians are no amateurs as many would have us believe; nor are they passive collectors of knowledge held in sources; Wikipedians are, instead, active co-creators of knowledge in the form of facts that they support using specially chosen sources. The authority of Wikipedia and Wikipedians is garnered through the performative acts of citation, through the ability of individual editors to construct the traces that represent citation, and through the stabilization and destabilization of facts according to the ideological viewpoints of its editors. In venerating and selecting certain sources among others, Wikipedians also serve to reaffirm traditional centres of authority, while at the same time amplifying new centres of knowledge and denying the authority of knowledge that is not codified in practice. As a result, Wikipedia is becoming the site of new centres of expertise and authoritative knowledge creation, and is signalling a move towards the professionalization of the expertise required to produce factual data in the context of digital networks.

[1]  Christian Pentzold,et al.  Foucault@Wiki: first steps towards a conceptual framework for the analysis of Wiki discourses , 2006, WikiSym '06.

[2]  D. Weil,et al.  Full disclosure : the perils and promise of transparency , 2007 .

[3]  Amy Bruckman,et al.  Becoming Wikipedian: transformation of participation in a collaborative online encyclopedia , 2005, GROUP.

[4]  John Riedl,et al.  WP:clubhouse?: an exploration of Wikipedia's gender imbalance , 2011, Int. Sym. Wikis.

[5]  Henry Jenkins Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide , 2006 .

[6]  S. Lewis THE TENSION BETWEEN PROFESSIONAL CONTROL AND OPEN PARTICIPATION , 2012 .

[7]  R. Stuart Geiger,et al.  The work of sustaining order in wikipedia: the banning of a vandal , 2010, CSCW '10.

[8]  Joseph Reagle,et al.  "Free as in sexist?" Free culture and the gender gap , 2013, First Monday.

[9]  Martin Wattenberg,et al.  Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences- 2007 Talk Before You Type: Coordination in Wikipedia , 2022 .

[10]  Aaron D. Shaw,et al.  The Wikipedia Gender Gap Revisited: Characterizing Survey Response Bias with Propensity Score Estimation , 2013, PloS one.

[11]  Elizabeth F. Churchill,et al.  Behaviors, adverse events, and dispositions: An empirical study of online discretion and information control , 2010 .

[12]  Y. Benkler,et al.  Commons‐based Peer Production and Virtue* , 2006 .

[13]  T. P. Hughes,et al.  The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology , 1989 .

[14]  Oded Nov,et al.  The [Wikipedia] World is not flat: on the Organizational Structure of Online production Communities , 2014, ECIS.

[15]  S. Shapin Pump and Circumstance: Robert Boyle's Literary Technology , 1984 .

[16]  T. Gieryn Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional , 1983 .

[17]  Juliette De Maeyer The journalistic hyperlink , 2012 .

[18]  R. Stuart Geiger,et al.  "Writing up rather than writing down": becoming Wikipedia literate , 2012, WikiSym '12.

[19]  A. Bruckman Studying the amateur artist: A perspective on disguising data collected in human subjects research on the Internet , 2002, Ethics and Information Technology.

[20]  David R. Musicant,et al.  Barriers to the Localness of Volunteered Geographic Information , 2015, CHI.

[21]  Brian S. Butler,et al.  Don't look now, but we've created a bureaucracy: the nature and roles of policies and rules in wikipedia , 2008, CHI.

[22]  T. Gieryn,et al.  Boundaries of Science , 1995 .

[23]  Paul Dourish,et al.  Where the action is , 2001 .

[24]  Micah L. Sifry WikiLeaks and the Age of Transparency , 2011 .

[25]  K. Foot,et al.  Materiality and Media in Communication and Technology Studies: An Unfinished Project , 2013 .

[26]  S. L. Star,et al.  The Ethnography of Infrastructure , 1999 .

[27]  B. Latour,et al.  Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts , 1979 .

[28]  Geoffrey C. Bowker,et al.  Understanding infrastructure: History, heuristics and cyberinfrastructure policy , 2007, First Monday.

[29]  Yochai Benkler,et al.  The wealth of networks: how social production transforms markets and freedom , 2006 .

[30]  Routledge,et al.  Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy , 1998 .

[31]  Lawrence Lessig,et al.  Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy , 2008 .

[32]  C. Fuchs Social Media: A Critical Introduction , 2013 .

[33]  Adrian Mackenzie Cutting Code: Software and Sociality , 2006 .

[34]  Dariusz Jemielniak,et al.  Common Knowledge?: An Ethnography of Wikipedia , 2014 .

[35]  Axel Bruns,et al.  Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage , 2008 .

[36]  P. Kollock The Economies of Online Cooperation: Gifts and Public Goods in Cyberspace , 1999 .

[37]  Katrin Weller,et al.  Social Software in Academia: Three Studies on Users' Acceptance of Web 2.0 Services , 2010 .

[38]  J. Burrell The Field Site as a Network: A Strategy for Locating Ethnographic Research , 2009 .

[39]  D. Weinberger Too Big to Know: Rethinking Knowledge Now That the Facts Aren't the Facts, Experts Are Everywhere, and the Smartest Person in the Room Is the Room , 2012 .

[40]  David M. Berry,et al.  Critical Theory and the Digital , 2014 .

[41]  E. Trist,et al.  Some Social and Psychological Consequences of the Longwall Method of Coal-Getting , 1951 .

[42]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .