Récolte anglophone !

Au fil de la semaine, plusieurs articles anglophones ont retenu mon attention sur le sujet de la publication Web. J’ai pris plaisir à les lire en même temps qu’ils m’ont laissé quelques questions.
Prenons « Understanting media: weblogs are excellent communications media, but lousy communication tools » de Dave Pollard pour commencer. D’abord l’extrait, ensuite la question :
« Now, blogs also have two communication tools included: a publishing and subscription tool (RSS), which does transmit our messages (very well), and the rudimentary comments ‘thread’ functionality which, like a poor web forum, does allow some dialogue with the author and with other readers. The thread is a (lousy, and because it’s asynchronous, jerky) extension of our brains. To some extent the Internet itself is a communication tool that disseminates our blog comment; it is the blog’s « printing press ». And by that analogy, RSS is like the delivery truck that takes the newspaper to the subscriber’s house — both are communication tools, though RSS is clearly the superior delivery vehicle. »
Outil de communication ou média; est-ce si important de faire la distinction ?
Ensuite, il y a ce texte publié sous la rubrique « The Future of Secondary Education », « Students as Producers: Using the World Wide Web as Publishing House » :
« The World-Wide Web, a hypermedia interface to the Internet, can be viewed as a medium directed to the global community, in-as-much as anyone with access to the Internet and a Web browser becomes the audience for their work. As such, publishing on the World-Wide Web provides the kind of potential real-world exposure that can motivate students to engage with issues that concern them directly: for such a writing assignment; the teacher is not the only one who is going to read their writing. »
La question qui se pose ici est : Puisque ce texte date de janvier 1996, comment se fait-il que si peu de pas ait été faits en ce sens ?
Et puis, dans ce bon document (« Scholars Discover Weblogs Pass Test as Mode of Communication« ), on retrouve ce passage (déjà cité par Sébastien Paquet) :
« Blogging is dead, long live blogging. I suspect that over the next few years we will see a lot of calls suggesting that blogging has died, and I suspect that in a sense they will be right. The act of keeping a « Weblog » as a separate entity will become something of an anachronism. The broader world of collaborative Web publishing will continue to grow and converge with other technologies, including IM and e-mail. Imagine asking someone today if they are an « e-mailer. » That question made sense, among a certain group, 15 years ago, when you weren’t sure if someone had e-mail or not. I have a feeling that the production of public media — whether in the form of Weblogs, wikis, collaboratively filtered lifelogs, or some form that I am too shortsighted to predict — will be the moving force of a new era. »
Que faire pour concilier cette prédiction et la problématique entourant la fracture numérique ?
Et enfin, aujourd’hui, il y a ce texte, « Teenagers reach out via weblogs » :
« « I am now looking at the way blogs can be used in the class, as an educational technology, » Mr Huffaker said. The average blog post is over 2,000 words (per page), which is really interesting when you are trying to get kids to write essays. »
Quand on sait que David Huffaker était des RIMA 2004, la question devient « l’aurions-nous inspiré quelque peu ? »
Autant d’articles publiés en anglais qui me disent que nous sommes « dans le beat » pas à peu près !