I continue to be amazed that the Wikipedia has found a way to moderate all dissension about their articles, remains at least basically-trusted. The fact that it is one of the few information sites that is not trying to make money should be noted.
Journalism may imagine it has "peer review" in that they all criticize each other, but they m…
I continue to be amazed that the Wikipedia has found a way to moderate all dissension about their articles, remains at least basically-trusted. The fact that it is one of the few information sites that is not trying to make money should be noted.
Journalism may imagine it has "peer review" in that they all criticize each other, but they might consider going to academic peer-review standards: everybody contributes time to a pool of reviewers, assignments are random, reviews are anonymous.
Media organs participating get a seal of quality of some sort.
I am also fascinated by wikipedia! (And I've been really intrigued by the threat they're facing from AI.)
Early in the online journalism space, there were so many ideas floating around about how to use the power of the crowd to fact check, copy edit, report, etc. Unfortunately I think journalism is just too demanding and decentralized for that to work. Or, at the very least, to make it profitable. I love the idea of a crowd review, but I think the volume, speed, and expertise needed is just too great.
Although, really, we're also just describing reddit. 🤔
I continue to be amazed that the Wikipedia has found a way to moderate all dissension about their articles, remains at least basically-trusted. The fact that it is one of the few information sites that is not trying to make money should be noted.
Journalism may imagine it has "peer review" in that they all criticize each other, but they might consider going to academic peer-review standards: everybody contributes time to a pool of reviewers, assignments are random, reviews are anonymous.
Media organs participating get a seal of quality of some sort.
I am also fascinated by wikipedia! (And I've been really intrigued by the threat they're facing from AI.)
Early in the online journalism space, there were so many ideas floating around about how to use the power of the crowd to fact check, copy edit, report, etc. Unfortunately I think journalism is just too demanding and decentralized for that to work. Or, at the very least, to make it profitable. I love the idea of a crowd review, but I think the volume, speed, and expertise needed is just too great.
Although, really, we're also just describing reddit. 🤔