Earlier, I referenced this Wired article from last year on WikipediaScanner.  The site tracks edits of Wikipedia entries to known IP addresses within firms and organizations.  Wired has compiled a list of notable “salacious” edits from the past.  Here’s a news story discussing the PR and search engine optimization (SEO) implications of WikipediaScanner.

Vandalism And Wikipedia – 

While most edits are innocuous, some raise eyebrows.  

I’m interested in this because I feel that transparency will be increasingly important as Web 2.0 develops and we shift to 3.0, 4.0, etc.  Some of the things I’m working on is the implications of anonymity in social media and how it relates to business/organizational practice.  Some issues that aren’t well defined are:

• Policies regarding transparency versus secrecy (open source versus Apple)
• Managing public perceptions and organizational attitudes towards risk
• What are the proper features/applets (materialities of communication) that foster “collaboration and community” across different contexts?  Should these be staged?
• What are the preconditions for online communities be self-regulating?
• Nuances of online community culture self-reproduction

While anonymity and fluid identity was prevalent in Web 1.0, back when nobody knew you were a dog:

in Web 2.0, users are seeking the experiences of the 4Cs: conversation, community, commons, and collaboration.  I think in many instances that transparency facilitates the 4Cs through building social capital and trust.  Additionally, communitas and shared meaning systems, as well as the materialities of communications (applets, features, etc.), also foster/enable the experiences/practices in the 4Cs, but I don’t think all of these are invariant preconditions in all contexts.  

What are your thoughts on transparency?