Topic 5- Why I Hate Wikipedia

Lecture

This weeks lecture was on the topic "Why I Hate Wikipedia", it wasn't so much on why our lecturer hates wikipedia but rather on the premise that the internet can lend itself to create pure lies or untrue facts in a way in which they could be deemed reliable. The discussion began over a wikipedia article regarding Lee Cox, a former student who now teaches, however on wikipedia he is a well known doctor who has had a large dispute with another well known professor Steven Stockwell. Although neither of the articles main "characters" as such knew of there supposed involvement the way in which the document was structured would lead an unknowing web surfer to believe the "facts" included in the article. Although Wikipedia holds no real tangible source of fact for its articles it can still be viewed as a simple and semi reliable source for the basis of an assignment.

Tutorial

How do the ideas from Walter Benjamin's "Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" apply to contemporary digital media?

Benjamin’s ideas in regard to art can be applied to contempory digital media in some aspects depending on the situation. It can be agreed that anything can be considered art, but only some may view the work as art. If a photograph is of a sculpture then it could be considered art, if a photograph is of a blade of grass it could also be considered art if it displayed emotion or even an alternative view on what we may consider the purpose of grass. In theory Benjamin’s ideas apply to digital art but the way in which they do is complicated and confusing in some ways.

There was a time when "Art" was made by artists who were skilled professionals. Now that anyone with a computer can create things digitally (music, images, videos, etc), what does that mean for "art"?

As the age of art has evolved so has the definition of an artist, what once was defined as an extremely talented artist who depicted the very lows and highs of life (Picasso, Van Gogh) in abstract or life like art has now become a generalised term for anyone who creates a piece or work which could be considered in some light art. The evolution of art has no negative side effect for the term “art” as even what we consider classic art had at some stage evolved from the original stages of art like rock art. In turn art will always remain art even if its true definition is deviated from as even the evolution of art can be considered art in itself.

Is a photo-shopped image "authentic"?

A photo shopped image in Benjamin’s theory is not truly “authentic” as it does not hold a tangible past or history of the piece. Although in some ways the history of the image could be traced its raw value or its original state would be considered the authentic piece of art. In the same reasoning however an animation could be considered a less authentic piece of art as it does not have the raw authentic background to it.

Do digital "things" have an "aura" (in Benjamin's terms)?

Benjamin discusses the fact that in regards to aura – “the technique of reproduction detaches the reproduced object from the domain of tradition”. In the theory of this an original piece of digital art could have an “aura” however if it was continually mechanically reproduced it would loose its history and its “significance point beyond the realm of art” (Benjamin, 1936, 4).

Reading

This weeks reading was entitled "Tlon, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius" talked about how information that is false can be perceived as true as long as a small amount of correct information is also given. In turn any lie can be seen as true as long as it has a portion of correct supporting evidence.