So you know Time magazine’s none-too-flattering treatment of the ‘troubles’ of Wikipedia? The one suggesting that the online encyclopedia—the paragon of intellectual collaboration, the testament to what we can achieve when we when put our minds, almost literally, together—has “hit the natural limit of knowledge expansion”?
Yes. Well. One person who isn’t, it turns out, such a fan of the Time piece—or, it seems, of that piece’s many, many Wikipedia-focused counterparts—is….Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales. Who today, in a blog entry for The Huffington Post’s brand-new “Technology” vertical, takes on “old media people” generally. Yes.
And: yowza.
I believe that the underlying facts about the Wikipedia phenomenon—that the general public is actually intelligent, interested in sharing knowledge, interested in getting the facts straight—are so shocking to most old media people that it is literally impossible for them to report on Wikipedia without following a storyline that goes something like this: “Yeah, this was a crazy thing that worked for awhile, but eventually they will see the light and realize that top-down control is the only thing that works.”
CJR is folowing the lead of Huffington post.
Fools leading the foolish.
If Columbia Journalism School had any actual reporters, they would wonder why, even though America is a two party system (not a Westminster multi-party one), why the Editors always wait to hear from the words of a Greek Ex-pat over American politics?
If we live in a one party system (sustained by CJR), I as a Jew should watch my door for any late night knocks.
Unless CJR actually starts repoting on "all the media,"
I doubt it.
Navsky runs CJR, so no criticism of American Prospect, Daily Kos, Huffington post, New republic, the Nation magazine, Frank Rich or Maureen Dowd.
#1 Posted by JSF, CJR on Mon 21 Sep 2009 at 10:54 PM
Hilarious!
You can just picture the big-money Time Mag people fanning themselves upon their fainting couch with a cool towel to the forehead, contemplating us masses and DFH's who, they find, are occasionally more knowledgable and even smarter than they are. Joe Klein and Karen Tumulty in particular get very worked up when someone deigns to point out an error in their reporting. Of course, they refuse to correct, even when you show documented proof of their error.
Reporters at Time Magazine are indifferent to facts and the truth. What matters to them is narrative. And they get VERY testy when one points out an error in the narrative. VERY testy.
#2 Posted by James, CJR on Wed 23 Sep 2009 at 12:55 PM