Tim O'Reilly has a great piece that explores the next phase of the web, which he calls Web 2.0. What we are seeing is a new way of forming community and information connections, which has important implicaitons for faith communities. Here are some key points I took from the article. I add my thoughts about what this might mean for churches after each.
1. The Long Tail
Small sites make up the bulk of the internet's content; narrow niches make up the bulk of internet's the possible applications. Therefore: Leverage customer-self service and algorithmic data management to reach out to the entire web, to the edges and not just the center, to the long tail and not just the head.
Churches have made a habit of having one style of worship, music, use of ritual, etc. that was their denomination's take on what it meant to be Christian. This one way of doing things, while potentially protecting denominational identity has done a disservice to people in local context. This model takes for granted a certain kind of person with a certain world view. We would be much better served by paying attention to denominational core understandings of theology, then adapting practice to fit local contexts, thereby serving many small communities, not just one historical big one.
3. Users Add Value
The key to competitive advantage in internet applications is the extent to which users add their own data to that which you provide. Therefore: Don't restrict your "architecture of participation" to software development. Involve your users both implicitly and explicitly in adding value to your application.
What does the membership of the faith community bring to the party? If a church view clergy as the expert and the congregation members only as learners or the uneducated, the church will miss a great deal of God's working in the world and the community. How can a church encourage and support the whole of the faith community in the sharing, supporting and development of what the church is and does? One of the issues slowing this down is a concern about doing church "right." Opening the forms of the church up to innovation, participation and creation by the membership will bring some great things, but will likely make many people uncomfortable as this will inevitably challenge "the way things have always been done."
5. Some Rights Reserved.
Intellectual property protection limits re-use and prevents experimentation. Therefore: When benefits come from collective adoption, not private restriction, make sure that barriers to adoption are low. Follow existing standards, and use licenses with as few restrictions as possible. Design for "hackability" and "remixability."
Private ownership of church resourcing will inevitably slow down innovation and force development companies to aim for the largest concentration of users, inhibiting growth on the fringes. (See long tail above.) Finding a way to open-source church resources would increase the likelyhood that an individual or group would get what they needed, allowing them to make necessary changes for their context, and then redistribute, making it even more likely that in the growing versions and tweaks the greater numbers of people are being served well. This could also reduce the typically high buy in price for church materials. Give the source away and let the users update it and share it.
