We asked... 
How does Web 2.0 allow individuals 
to exert or enact personal agency or influence?
Responses were mixed
Definitions varied...
Some agreed agency was possible
Some disagreed that agency was possible
Allows for self-reflection and sharing opinions
Can make your voice heard
Gives more people the ability to publish
People have a choice about their influences
Allows for increased rhetorical sense
To communicate without traditional filters
Gives individuals power and control to create 
More democratic interaction
Allows individuals to work together as a force
Any online ethos dependent on the impressions of others
It's dependent on the technology
Influence dependent on ability to attract audience
Opportunity alone doesn't guarantee influence
It's a version of agency, but also an alienation
Web 2.0 has not fundamentally changed agency
Where do you stand?