Vetter references the history feature of Wikipedia a few times and speculates at how it allows students to deconstruct notions of authorship and the final text. Also, consider his statement that the encyclopedia entry "suggests a model of knowledge that is at once democratic and heteroglossic, but also strongly tethered to western textual traditions". In what ways do these ideas relate to remix? What implications does this hold for developing multimedia pedagogies?
User tag needed to review the log/rationale behind democratic revisions
Capitalist notions of authorial credit - who owns what? Seems more communist, with Wikipedia as the supreme leader
Greene--entering the convo. Remix is a material manifestation of entering the convo where different voices collide </li>
vetter talks about challenging the notion of the final product--things can always change/be edited--creating something new--conversation always continues </li>
exposes the myth of the solitary writer (multimodal literacy narrative/collaborative ethnography)--issues with assessment and authorship </li>
palmeri--revision and remix are probably synonymous looking back at the history of revision/remix (how does intertextuality fit in here) </li>
what about original research? wikipedia says no to it--vetter says yes. </li>