Open Access News

News from the open access movement


Friday, February 20, 2009

Combining wiki-style openness and expertise

Larry Sanger, The Fate of Expertise after WIKIPEDIA, Episteme, February 2009.  Sanger is the founder of Citizendium and co-founder of Wikipedia

Abstract:   Wikipedia has challenged traditional notions about the roles of experts in the Internet Age. Section 1 sets up a paradox. Wikipedia is a striking popular success, and yet its success can be attributed to the fact that it is wide open and bottom-up. How can such a successful knowledge project disdain expertise? Section 2 discusses the thesis that if Wikipedia could be shown by an excellent survey of experts to be fantastically reliable, then experts would not need to be granted positions of special authority. But, among other problems, this thesis is self-stultifying. Section 3explores a couple ways in which egalitarian online communities might challenge the occupational roles or the epistemic leadership roles of experts. There is little support for the notion that the distinctive occupations that require expertise are being undermined. It is also implausible that Wikipedia and its like might take over the epistemic leadership roles of experts. Section 4 argues that a main reason that Wikipedia’s articles are as good as they are is that they are edited by knowledgeable people to whom deference is paid, although voluntarily. But some Wikipedia articles suffer because so many aggressive people drive off people more knowledgeable than they are; so there is no reason to think that Wikipedia’s articles will continually improve. Moreover, Wikipedia’s commitment to anonymity further drives off good contributors. Generally, some decision-making role for experts is not just consistent with online knowledge communities being open and bottom-up, it is recommended as well.

From the conclusion:

...Wikipedia’s success is not best explained by its radical egalitarianism, its rejection of expert involvement, but instead by its freedom, openness, and bottom-up management, all of which are consistent with a low-key role for experts....

There is no doubt that many experts would, if left to their own devices, dismantle the openness and bottom-up nature that drives the success of Wikipedia. But the failure to take seriously the suggestion of any role for experts can only be considered a failure of imagination. One need only ask what an open, bottom-up system with a role for expert decision-making would look like.