Pink Floyd

What is collective intelligence? It sounds like something pretty sophisticated, doesn’t it? Henry Jenkins believes that, everyone knows something, but no one knows everything. Jenkins defines collective intelligence as, “…the ability to pool knowledge and compare notes with others towards a common goal” (Jenkins, part 2). Modern society is full of collective intelligence. With so many communication tools at our disposal, collective intelligence is fairly easy to come by, take Wikipedia for example. A website where users can contribute their information and publish it to a central location seems very convenient, but the fact that almost anyone can edit these article does raise some red flags.

Growing up, my father had always stressed that I should listen to “real” music – not some compilation of sounds jumbled up from a computer to make music. He got me listening to artists and bands like the Red Hot Chili Peppers, Dave Matthews Band, Carlos Santana, and Peter Gabriel. Of all the bands he showed me, my favorite was certainly Pink Floyd. Given that my father grew up listening to Pink Floyd, I had no reason to doubt him and what he had told me about them. The Wikipedia page matches the same information that he had told me. Everything from their rise to fame in the 1960’s to the breaking up of the band and beyond is correct and I would think that because of the number of edits the page has had since it began in 2001.


With almost 16,000 edits and with over 9,000 edits coming from the top 10 percent of active users, it’s safe to say that Wikipedia’s collective intelligence on Pink Floyd is accurate.

The Pink Floyd Wikipedia page is also one of the most frequently visited pages of all of Wikipedia. Within the last 30 days, the article has been visited 233,385 times! The amount of web traffic alone should say something about the accuracy of the article. With that many people visiting the page, the information needs to be as precise as possible.


From generating so much web traffic, Wikipedia does not grant permission for just anyone to edit. There are certain criteria that a user must meet before being able to edit this article, which can also attest to the validity of the information given to us in the article. In this case, collective intelligence is a beautiful thing and has become an everyday occurrence.

Works Cited:

“Pink Floyd.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 16 Feb. 2014. Web. 16 Feb. 2014.

Jenkins, Henry. “WHAT WIKIPEDIA CAN TEACH US ABOUT THE NEW MEDIA LITERACIES (PART TWO).” Web log post. Confessions of an AcaFan. N.p., 27 June 2007. Web. 12 Feb. 2014.


An Everyday Nuisance

Nowadays, we are so consumed with social media, it seems as if we are drowning in it. The social media craze began with MySpace and then shifted to Facebook. With new technologies and smart phones, the capabilities that we have are endless. Humans seem to be driven off of communication and competition and those qualities are found within the social media apps of the new generation. I am talking about Twitter and Instagram. Twitter is the same concept as Facebook; users have their home page, a newsfeed, a messaging center, and a place to post their own thoughts and ideas. Instagram is a little different, it offers a new spin on older social media; users, instead of posting words, now post a picture with various filters and are then offered a space to caption their photo – not much is different other than this is a photo based platform instead of text. Instagram keeps users competitive by allowing “likes” and “followers” to be seen by anyone. I found that even within my own group of friends, we all strive to have the most “likes” though they are seemingly meaningless.

After launching in October of 2010, Instagram dominated the app store gaining over 100 million by April of 2012. But what has happened in the 2 years after the Insta-craze? I found that with my phone, I have a routine whenever I wake up which goes like this: I wake up, I check Messages, then Twitter, then Instagram, then I get out of bed and start my day. It has become a daily routine since I don’t know how long. Tom Gunning’s article, “Re-Newing Old Technologies: Astonishment, SecondNature, and the Uncanny in Technology from the Previous Turn-of the Century” wonders how things go from innovation into a habitual utility. Gunning asks the question, “What happens in modernity to the initial wonder at a new technology when the novelty has faded into the banality of the everyday?” (Gunning 42). He then offers John Onian’s four stages in which amazement turns into learning as an explanation. These four steps consist of:

1. A striking experience, usually visual, but sometimes aural.

2. A consequent physical paralysis.

3. A reaction which results in something being learned, and may be followed by

4. A new action

These steps accompany almost every technological advancement whether it be something as complex as a new operating system, or something as simple as an app like Instagram, and through these steps, we familiarize ourselves with the technology and it becomes a daily routine. Some groups of people despise Instagram claiming it to be a nuisance and a hindrance to everyday activities. Because of its ease and our familiarity, we tend to use it at the most inappropriate of times and this meme illustrates different people’s perceptions of it and its usage:


Works Cited:

Gunning, Tom. (2003) “Re-Newing Old Technologies: Astonishment, SecondNature, and the Uncanny in Technology from the Previous Turn-of the Century”. In D. Thorburn and H. Jenkins (eds), Rethinking Media Change:The Aesthetics of Transition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp 39-60.