Mediaboss Marketing

For more than 15 years, Mr Jimmy Wales has been the poster boy for the promise and the power of crowd-sourcing. When he launched Wikipedia in 2001, virtually everyone scoffed at the idea of a free and open-sourced online encyclopaedia with articles written by amateurs. Today it is the world's fifth-most visited website, a go-to destination when almost anyone wants to learn about almost anything.

Having redefined and restructured one historical repository of trusted information, the encyclopedia, Mr Wales is now taking on another, the newspaper. His new initiative, called Wikitribune, will combine the work of paid professional journalists with volunteer contributors. It's an effort to counter the rise of "fake news" and other forms of misinformation by exposing it to the scrutiny of the entire world.

The model is similar, though not identical, to that of Wikipedia, with which Wikitribune is not formally affiliated. The news site will be free of advertising and free to read, with funding provided by donors and by "supporters".

These monthly subscribers will have the ability to shape the site's agenda, for instance, by steering journalists towards coverage of particular issues, although the editorial process will block attempts to artificially boost pet projects or perspectives. The public will be able to modify and update articles, but updates will not be published until they have been approved by a Wikitribune journalist or another trusted source.

In other words: crowd-funded, crowd-sourced and crowd-fact checked.

Will it work? The success of Wikipedia suggests it might. Wikipedia now includes nearly 5.4 million English-language entries, totalling 42 million-plus pages. It also publishes in 294 other languages, including a great many that most of us have never heard of, and claims 68 million users worldwide.

Although no one has yet had clear success with crowd-funded news, initiatives like pay-per-view news aggregator Blendle and member-funded De Correspondent (both Dutch in origin but testing the United States market) continue to innovate. Someone is going to get there.

Yes, all that information is from its own website. But I believe it.

And that's the point. Wikipedia has earned the trust of millions of users by listening to its critics and transparently making a good faith effort to address their concerns. Information found to be flawed is removed, and various other changes through the years have strengthened the reliability of its content without gutting the central concept: real people have interesting and valuable contributions to make to the storehouse of what the rest of us know.

As Mr Wales admits: "It's noisy and not a perfect place." But Wikipedia's openness has proved to be its strength. It's not so much about the general wisdom of the crowd as about the particular wisdom of the millions of individuals who make up that crowd.

Will Wikitribune prove financially sustainable? Again, it might. The election of Mr Donald Trump was, at least for some segments of society, a wake-up call that high-quality news is valuable enough to actually pay for. Leading print publications such as The New York Times and The Guardian, among others, as well as investigative sites such as ProPublica, have seen a sharp increase in subscriptions.

Although no one has yet had clear success with crowd-funded news, initiatives like pay-per-view news aggregator Blendle and member-funded De Correspondent (both Dutch in origin but testing the United States market) continue to innovate. Someone is going to get there. And it might well be Mr Wales. He has the experience, the connections, the vision and the passion.

Will it help?

Finally, the most important question is whether Wikitribune will change anything. Again, it just might. The surge in populist politics in Europe and the US has had shocking effects but isn't inherently startling. The anger and frustration of people who feel they are being ignored, misled or outright trammelled by powerful institutions in society - including the media - were palpable well before the Brexit referendum, the 2016 US election or the rise of Ms Marine Le Pen in France. And around the world, trust in the media is at a historic low.

Wikitribune proposes to counter that sense of alienation not just by making people feel the news is relevant to them, but also by inviting them to directly and personally engage with its production. If you feel a news account is inaccurate, propose a correction. If you feel it is biased, provide the countervailing evidence. If you are wrong, no harm done. Your contribution will be vetted and rejected, and at least one bit of fake news will not blight our collective understanding of the world. But if you are right, then you have helped not just yourself but the rest of us as well. Because in the end, we all share responsibility for the health of our networked society.

The writer is professor of journalism innovation at City University of London.

This article first appeared in theconversation.com, a website of analyses from academics and researchers.

Read more:
Wikipedia founder takes the fight to fake news - The Straits Times

April 30 2017, 12:01am,The Sunday Times

Sarah Baxter

The site is to offer news but is unreliable; only a free press gets at the truth

It is very bad form to google yourself or to check your own entry on Wikipedia. It was my son who tipped me off that I sounded like a deranged warmonger. What? I immediately looked myself up. He was exaggerating, but not by much. Whoever compiled my Wikipedia entry clearly thinks my position on the Iraq War is the most interesting thing about me.

It was pretty accurate as these things go. Among the factual guff about my work and personal life culled from the News UK website, its true that I supported the First Gulf War in the 1990s and later backed George W Bush for US president over John Kerry in 2004 because of the war on terror.

Maybe these really are the

Read the original post:
Wikipedia won't break real news - The Times (subscription)

Despite all the differences that separate a bustling Asian metropolis and Anytown, U.S.A, humanity has a few common shared interests: pop culture, sex and ... geography.

This is according to data from Wikipedia, the crowd-edited encyclopedia thats one of the most popular websites in the world. The site is visited by more than 1 billion devices a day, according to the companys internal data, and it offers more than 41 million articles in more than 200 languages.

But despite that breadth of subjects, there are a few topics that are particularly popular across the globe.

Read: These are the websites that rule the internet in the U.S.

Among English-language articles, pop culture-related entries make up slightly more than 40% of page hits for the top 100 pages. That was also the most-popular category for Chinese-language (also slightly above 40%) and Japanese-language pages. Pop culture was by far the most dominant category in Japan, accounting for almost 80% of the page hits for the top 100 pages.

If you know Japan, that shouldnt surprise you, said Jimmy Wales, Wikipedias co-founder.

While pop culture ranked as one of the most in-demand categories on Wikipedia across regions, it was less popular elsewhere. In France and Germany, it was second to geography; nearly 40% of the top 100 pages in German were related to that topic.

Im not sure thats a good thing, Wales joked of Germanys keen interest in the rest of the globe.

Geography was also the top topic in Russian-language Wikipedia entries, followed by sex-related topics.

In fact, sex ranked as a major area of interest across regions, though not to the extent it was in Russia. It was the sixth-most popular topic in English and German-language pages, and the third-most popular on Chinese and Japanese pages, although it comprised a small percentage in Japan.

There are two languages where sex doesnt appear as a favorite topic: French and Spanish.

This confused me at first, Wales said, until it was explained to me that the French and Spanish are actually having sex, while the rest of us are just reading about it.

Read: Netflix finds a way into China, but its not quite what it really wants

Despite the ubiquity of Wikipedia, Wales acknowledged that these results could be skewed given certain biases in who writes and edits the site.

While anyone can make changes or submit new articles, 87% of the contributors are male. We do consider that a problem. Its something we would really like to change, Wales said. We know that people write about things theyre passionate about, and there is a gender component to that.

He noted that entries about award-winning female authors tended, on average, to be shorter than ones about award-winning male authors.

Its not that the contributors are overtly sexist, but due to issues outside Wikipedia, their interests arent necessarily consistent, which shows up on the site. He added that some women may be put off from contributing by the dominance of male contributors. We want to make sure that women arent being excluded by badly behaving men in the community, he said.

Wales spoke at the Morningstar Investment Conference, and focused his talk on the spread of free information. He noted that Wikipedia recently encrypted its programming as a security measure, prohibiting spying governments, for example, from seeing which specific article a reader was viewing.

Read: There are only nine five-star U.S. stocks, but dont panic: Morningstar CEO

Previously, governments could have banned specific articles on Wikipedia, while leaving others accessible. The move to encryption forced them to decide whether to block the whole site or allow readers full access. Every country opted to allow Wikipedia, with the sole exception of China, Wales said.

It sounds like a paradox, he added, but encryption led to the spread of free knowledge.

Read the original post:
Sex, pop culture and the other most popular Wikipedia topics by language - MarketWatch

Often, the advice given to writers who claim they cant write for women or dont know how to write male characters is to write a character the way they normally would and then change the damn pronoun. But that hasnt stopped generations of authors from engendering certain actions and attitudes to the particular sexes. In general, it can be said that men are written to be active, while women are more often passive. Exploring this binary division further, data scientist David Robinson analyzed which verbs most often follow he or she in the Wikipedia plot descriptions of over 100,000 movies, books, TV shows, and video games. The results highlight a stark contrast along lines of violence, forgiveness, and power.

Credit: Variance Explained

Robinson was inspired by his colleague Julia Silges analysis of gendered verbs in the novels of particular authors, but wanted to expand the dataset, focusing on verbs with at least 200 uses and that skewed the most one way or another. Noting that the text hes analyzing is Wiki plot descriptions and not the authors original work, Robinson says its almost more about what happens than how an author describes the work: were less likely to see thinks or says, but more likely to see shoots or escapes.

A look at words relating to violence and crime. Credit: Variance Explained

At a glance, we can see that men are often instigators: He proposes; he rescues; he kidnaps. While female characters arent left with much else but resignation: She accepts; she forgives; she cries. Of course, as with any cold, scientific analysis, these graphs leave out many of the exceptions to the rule and lack any sort of nuance the original author might have employed. But its an interesting look at the way our culture has effected the gender binary in fiction, and vice versa.

Submit your Great Job, Internet tips here.

Go to the A.V. Club homepage

See original here:
Wikipedia plot descriptions think men save, women forgive - A.V. Club

Image via Wikimedia Commons/Francesa Lissoni

In 2011, asurvey report by the Wikimedia Foundationput numbers behind what many had long suspected: Wikipedia is largely the product of cis white men.

The survey found that only 8.5 percentof Wikipedia editors identify as female, and less than 1 percentas transgender. The startling report echoed the conclusions of researchers at the University of Minnesota, who found that this lack of diversity among editors creates noticeable content disparities: Wikipedia articles on topics that are typically gendered as feminine tend to be shorter and less developed than articles on subjects related to men, and women artists are less likely to have lengthy, in-depth entries on Wikipedia.

More recently,The Atlanticreported onmale editors harassing female colleagues, and noted that many women feel unwelcome due to content thats hostile toward them. (Movie entries, for instance, often refer to rape scenes as sex scenes or even making love.)Meanwhile, internal efforts at Wikipedia to fix the gender gap have, by admission of the sites own founder,completely failed.

And gender imbalance isnt Wikis only problem.

The racial demographics of Wikipedia editors remain under studiedthe Wikipedia page for Wikipedians doesnt address race at all under its demographicssectionwhich is itself rather alarming. But the Wikimedia report does note that Wikipedia editors are disproportionately from countries in the Global North, largely North America and Europe.

Content disparities further suggest that editors often overlook the narratives of people of color. Wikipedia lacks entries for many notable people of colorfor example, only nine of Haitis 37 first ladies have Wikipedia articles, whereas all 45 first ladies of the United Stateshave entries. Similarly, the entry for theHistory of Montana(with 90 citations) is far longer and more thorough than that oftheHistory of Botswana(3 citations). Other prominent people of color lacking Wikipedia articles includeJudy Juanita, a novelist and playwright who served as editor in chief of the Black Panther Party newspaper in the late 1960s;Milton Allimadi, publisher and CEO of TheBlack Star News; and Zambian-born writer and graphic novelistEfemia Chela, who was nominated for The 2014 Caine Prize For African Writing.

Considering that Wikipedia receives273 million page views perday, these disparities matter, ensuring that a large swathe of the population is exposed to a very limited view of the world.

Fortunately, activists are working to correct this lack of representation by writing women and people of color into Wikipedia.

It may seem counterintuitive to use Wikipedia as a platform for activism. After all, according to the sites owncommunity guidelines, articles must be written from a neutral point of view and shouldavoid advocacy.But given the sites popularity and crowdsourcing model, its also an ideal way to broaden the artistic canon that so often excludes women andpeople of colorespecially in the current political climate.

In 2014, Wikipedias potential as a tool for change inspired a group of artists, academics, and activistsSin Evans, Jacqueline Mabey, Michael Mandiberg, and Laurel Ptakto launch Art+Feminism, an organization dedicated to increasing the visibility of marginalized artists by expanding and adding Wikipedia entries related to feminism and the arts.

Since then, Art+Feminism has been working to reshape Wikipedias demographics and content by hosting edit-a-thons, events that encourage people of all genders to edit the site. In the last three years, Art+Feminism has hosted more than 280 events around the world, welcoming anyone and everyone interested in learning more about editing Wikipedia, regardless of experience, gender, or background.

The organizations founders believe that editing Wikipedia can be an empowering act. Mandiberg, who had taught Wikipedia editing to his students at CUNY, found that collaborating on editing stubsunderdeveloped articles lacking citations and detailed informationwith experienced Wikipedians showed students just how valuable their knowledge could be to a wide community of readers.

Art+Feminism event in Lima, Per (Image via Wikimedia Commons/Lapalabranecesaria)

This March, I attended Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon at the Modern Museum of Art Archive andLibrary in New York, where community membersmost of them womengathered for a day of trainings and panels. Throughout the day, volunteers from Interference Archive, a group that studies how art and culture intersect with social movements, andAfroCrowdand Black Lunch Table, organizations that host Wikipedia Edit-a-thons focused on increasing the visibility of black people and people of African descent, led break-out sessions and discussions.

Arriving in the librarys airy lobby, I registered, made a name tag, and picked up a badge showing a version of the woman power symbol with the raised fist wielding a paintbrush, then joined the other attendees loitering by the coffee stationmost of whom were women.

Most of the people I met at the edit-a-thon, like me, had never edited Wikipedia before. Many seemed to have arrived almost by chance;one student told me shed decided to join the event after attending a panel on feminism the previous week.Later, I spoke with an illustrator who had spotted the event on Facebook, or maybe Eventbrite. Many of the women I met with told me they were seeking out new forms of activism in the months following the election and the Womens March. Darla Elsbernd, an architect who I spoke with during lunch, told me, It seemed to be the right time to take action and get involved in a meaningful way. This idea was echoed in a statement from Art+Feminisms current lead coordinators, Evans, Mabey, Mandiberg, and Mckensie Mack, who told me:

When you have a government actively pushing alternative facts, improving the reliability and completeness of Wikipedia is an important act of everyday resistance. And people seem to recognize this and responded to our call to action.

I was surprised to discover that many of the event participants, including Art+Feminism co-founder SinEvans, were librarians. Academics often regard Wikipedia with suspicion, and many students are taught never to use it. (In high school and college, I had been vehemently warned away from Wikipedia by teachers, librarians, and professors.) But many librarians and academicsat least those involved with the edit-a-thonexpressed a different view.

As I sipped my coffee at the event, I found myself chatting with Helen Lane, an Emerging Technologies Librarian at the Fashion Institute of Technology, who uses Wikipedia to teach students how to conduct research and think critically about sources. Lane asked, What better way to teach research and critical thinking skills than to have students research and write articles that require citations from verifiable sources and which undergo a very public peer-review process?

Art+Feminism event in Taiwan (Image via Wikimedia Commons)

In the past two years, Lane has hosted two edit-a-thon events at FIT, one inspired by Art+Feminism and one officially affiliated with the organization. Her aim in hosting the events, she said, was to encourage our mostly female student body to engage with technology. Lane values Art+Feminisms mission, in part, because her work as a librarian has shown her how gender bias has historically led to the devaluation of fields like fashion history. She explained:

It was considered, until a few decades ago, a frivolous, feminine topic not worthy of academic pursuit. This could even be seen in the collection policies of major university libraries. Why hold on to old copies of Vogue? Be sure to weed out the old books on beauty when the featured makeup trends pass. In the case of fashion and costume history, however, I think that academia is ahead of Wikipedia in its serious coverage of the topic.

Wikipedias crowdsourcing model gives it the potential to cover topics that have been marginalized in traditional academia. Unfortunately, as Lanes comments on fashion history show, that potential remains largely unfulfilled. Wikipedias gender gap has led to the replication of gender biases in academia and traditional publishing on Wikipedia. During the training session I attended, Evans explained that community guidelines ask editors to flag and delete entries that do not adequately cite third party sources that are considered reliableand even on Wikipedia, reliable generally means mainstream. As a result, entries for women and minority artists who have not been reported on by mainstream publications or referenced in multiple peer-reviewed works are at risk for deletion.

At the same time, some argue that Wikipedias anonymous, crowdsourcing model is detrimental to the work of women and minority scholars. Lane told me:

The most resistance I have received at FIT to my involvement with Wikipedia Edit-a-thons has come from an individual who had to fight to be recognized as a scholar of merit because she was a woman and because her field of research is costume and textile history. She is deeply offended by the idea that anyone can write for Wikipedia and that the entries are anonymous, because she feels that it undermines the work of women who are fighting to be recognized as authorities and scholars. I actually understand where shes coming from. Its too bad she wont join us. We could use her knowledge.

I have to wonder if Lanes colleague has a point; too often, in academia and in so many other aspects of our society, the contributions of women and people of color go unnoticed or overlooked. Its a privilege to be able to afford to volunteer ones work (and editing Wikipedia articles certainly is work) without any kind of recognition. And yet, Im also drawn to the notion that Wikipedia can be a platform that makes the stories of marginalized people more visible.

Art+Feminism is still growing and developing as an organization. In a joint statement, the organizations lead coordinators told me, We believe that feminism is praxis, ideas enacted as an everyday ethical practice, and part of that practice is constant reflection. The organization is committed to intersectional feminism, and this year, with the support of a $100,000 grant from the Wikimedia Foundation, it has expanded its leadership team with the intention of becoming more international and inclusive. Consultants Daniela Capistrano and Brittany Oliver are working with Art+Feminism to improve outreach to queer communities and communities of color across the United States,and Art+Feminism now has project ambassadors based around the United Statesand in Ghana, Peru, Canada, and Europe.

There is no doubt in my mind that edit-a-thons are making a positive mark on Wikipedia. Over 2,500 participants at more than 200 events around the world participated in Art+Feminisms fourth annual Wikipedia Edit-a-thon, creating or improving nearly 6,500 articles on Wikipedia, almost twice the output of the 2016 events.

Though anyone with an internet connection can edit Wikipedia, such events create a sense of camaraderie and purpose among individuals who might not otherwise become Wikipedians. Wikipedias power as a tool for activism lies in its crowdsourcing model. As Art+Feminisms lead coordinators told me, Wikipedia is something that belongs to all of us.

This piece is published in partnership withThe Establishment.

View post:
How Activists Are Diversifying Wikipedia One Edit At A Time - GOOD Magazine