MEDIATECHBUSINESS
Wikipedia's Jimmy Wales wanted to save journalism. He didn't
MEDIATECHBUSINESS

Wikipedia's Jimmy Wales wanted to save journalism. He didn't

Published: December 2, 2019  |  14 min read, 2769 words
WRITTEN BY
Your review will affect the following:
wired.co.ukwired.co.ukGian VolpicelliGian Volpicelli
When it launched in 2017, WikiTribune had a bold plan to rewrite the journalism rulebook. Less than a year later it had laid off all its editorial staff after burning through hundreds of thousands of pounds. What went wrong? “Jimmy’s frame of reference about journalism is that it’s easy, it’s just a nice turn of phrase. That comes from believing that the wiki-way means you can do anything.” In 2017, Jimmy “Jimbo” Wales – the Wikipedia cofounder whose plaintive face used to haunt the free encyclopedia’s homepage during fundraising campaigns – decided to save journalism. As an avid consumer... READ MORE
CRITIC
N/A
N/Ano rating
Critic Reviews: N/A
We calculate ratings after a minimum of three reviews.
USER
img-trusted
100%trust it
User Reviews: 3
Average: 4.5/5
TOP REVIEWS
Great Context2
Well Sourced1
Investigative1

CRITIC REVIEWS

There don't seem to be any reviews yet.

USER REVIEWS

Great Context
December 2, 2019
Great Context
This is a fantastic, in-depth look at WikiTribune and Jimmy Wale's decision to pivot into crowdsourced fact-checking of articles. Sounds familiar *cough cough. Author Gian Volpicelli provides a ton of great content in a balanced way, hopefull that WikiTribune can solve some of our media problems while remaining skeptical of the road ahead.
Is this helpful?
Great Context
December 3, 2019
Great Context
Once we get over the idea that 'ask' is a noun according to the "see we're hip" wired style guide, the article itself is actually a fine piece of writing. Included in the wealth of context is a great story about hubris, entitlement and reflection, allowing the bulk of detailed writing to flow like it should. Would only we could ditch pandering to the kids and sales representatives with this week's "let's do lunch" cliche.
Is this helpful?
Investigative
December 27, 2019
Investigative
Resonably thorough explanation as to why the wiki model of information gathering and editing doesn't work well in contemporary journalism. I do admit bias, in that it seems to me such a model for journalism would be necesssarily either unwieldy or less than open. I would have been surprised had this effort succeeded. Having said that: this article does go into some depth, as to why the Wiki-Journal model of news reporting didn't succeed. To say that one project can 'save journalism' is like saying one car can save the automotive industry, and that's simply not so. Even were this able to produce truly unbiased news, with journalism being a market, are there any buyers for that? That questin seems to not be much addressed. But overall, a good effort to explain this issue.
Is this helpful?