Reading this chapter helped me be more conscious of what and how I link I to any online written pieces. Now that we’re on to “Web 2.0, from the read-only web to the read-write web” everything is more interactive (42). Instead of the computer only working one way, it’s now an interactive process between the reader and writer. I guess I never took the time to think about this since it’s always been a part of my life in this aspect. Since it is so interactive, however, whatever we put on our websites, blogs, articles, etc. will reflect on us a person. Referring back to the case study on pages 41-42, depending on what we link to we can persuade an audience to feel a certain way or we can give a depiction of our own opinion.
This can be good and bad. Positively it allows us to link to related resources if our audience wants to read more about something. This could be other sites or even to our own previous blog posts. These links could also be a bad thing; if we link to a website whose author doesn’t have any credentials and we’re doing a scholarly-type article, or hyperlink to a blog or site that’s not the respectable, it puts us in a bad light. Being careful, looking for credentials if we need them or making sure everything on a site is appropriate before we link to it would be a great way to solve any problems before they start.
Going back to being able to interact with each other online, the online community between bloggers –or a blogroll— was something I never noticed. I’m not an avid blogger and don’t necessary know how to maneuver around on someone’s blog once I find one that interests me. I’m actually really interested in figuring out how to create an elaborate blog or website and join online community. Again, it would be important to make sure the blogs in my blogroll are respectable and appropriate, but overall I think it’s a great way to promote other people’s work and your.