My greatest observation between the two is the validity of the feedback. Let's be honest, someone's opinion about a product can be extremely bias, and often not holistically speaking. On the other hand, reading a product description on a company's website about one of their products isn't necessarily reliable at all times either. So, how do we trust either side of the argument? I guess that's when you compare the feedback from both sides and weigh out the differences while considering the alternatives to the options at hand.
When regarding education, sources from both the Web 1.0 and 2.0 can be good and bad. A positive side to the Web 2.0 is reading reviews on books, journal articles, applications (of any sort), and just about anything else out there. However, with this positive comes a very negative aspect as well. If you use such sources for research then your research will be threatened due to loss of validity. This occurs when someone uses secondary sources to try to prove or disprove an argument. The only valid sources of evidence for research come from primary sources, which most often eliminates the usefulness of Web 2.0 sources. Thus, the use of Web 1.0 is still extremely valuable for educational purposes.
For most of my research I use professional journal articles, most often from the NSCA's website and other accredited journal sites, which are primary sources. My question to you, the reader, would be "what sources of Web 2.0 content are valid for use in collecting evidence for research?" I'm curious to know if there are legitimate sources on the internet that fall within this category, to be used for educational research purposes.
Thanks for reading and responding.
by, Steven Waite