In 2005, the L.A. Times decided to try something revolutionary for an elite news outlet: they created a wikitorial, posting questions and comments from Times op/ed writers regarding the Iraq war, and let the readers write the commentary, with each person logging in next having the opportunity to change it however they seem fit. This is the model by now famous (or infamous) wikipedia, and needless to say, the blogosphere was excited to have an elite, paternal newspaper delve itself into the bowels of the everyday person and allow this type of interaction.
The wikitorial went live on June 17, 2005. This “experiment” was prophesied with the statement that “wiki this page” would be as common on news Web sites as “printer-friendly” or “e-mail this article.”
The “experiment” was a failure. Pornography ads flashed on the wikitorial, “Fuck USA” plastered over the screen, removal of more “intelligent” parts of the commentary were removed to post statements like “Bush should be tried for war crimes against humanity.” The page was established on Friday, but by early Saturday morning, LA Times editors had removed it. The page still exists today, and the two-sentence message clearly reflects both the sadness of the editors from the vulgarity and profaneness, yet they still seem to be optimistic that this may be used again: “Unfortunately, we have had to remove this feature, at least temporarily, because a few readers were flooding the site with inappropriate material. Thanks and apologies to the thousands of people who logged in with the right spirit.” http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-wiki-splash,0,1349109.story
For the sci-fi fans out there, this reminds me of Skynet from the movie Terminator 2. Skynet was an artificial intelligence defense system that went live in 1997, and learned how to control itself without human involvement, and would ultimately start the human vs. robot war of the early 20th century. This wikitorial idea, to me, is a prehistoric, linguisitic start to this type of future. The mass amateurization of the press can result in a dead press; it’s not probable, but possible. If the gatekeeper press dies, and we all become the news, who is going to be right? Is your porn-funded news site going to be more right than mine? And once the Idiocracy-generation (another good movie) has taken over the news, will there be news wars? Will the elite press send out its journalistic soldiers to electronically “defeat” simple, “average person” writers? I hope Cyberdyne Systems is listening…
Questions:
- If you were the editor of the LA Times, how would you have set up a wikitorial? Is there anyway you can think of to stop pornography posts, vulgarity or profanity, or are these types of today’s electronic social media just come with the territory?
- Why would newspapers want to create wikitorials? Will bringing everyday readers into the news process strengthen or hurt traditional news reporting?
Sources used: LA Times, New York Times, The Guardian
OR
This work is licensed under a 
April 24, 2008 at 10:17 am |
[...] The ‘public beta’ without the ‘right spirits’ – Lorin [...]
April 29, 2008 at 10:16 am |
[...] J. (2004, Mar 25). What Is Journalism? And What Can Weblogs Do About It? PressThink. The ‘public beta’ without the ‘right spirits’ (Lorin) Respondents: Jason, KC, Sammi, WhitneyC, [...]
April 29, 2008 at 11:52 am |
The LA Times introduction to blogging was certainly less than desirable. In retrospect, do you think the LA Times should have handled the situation differently? As an outsider, do you view the LA Times action as irresponsible or simply a beginners mistake?
April 29, 2008 at 11:56 am |
If you like this notion being taken up in Sci-fi fiction you might want to check out the Ender series by Orson Scott Card. One of the story lines is how a couple of children essentially change the political scheme of the world by “acting” as adult political commentators through a system similar to the internet, basically blogs. This kinda speaks to your question about who is society going to be paying attention to when the news gate keeper dies. Another interesting idea to think about is how will amateurization of mass media be used by highly ambitious people using it only to achieve a means rather than act in the interest of the people?
April 29, 2008 at 11:57 am |
I think that you make a good point in comparing wikitorials to Skynet from the Terminator 2 movie. I personally haven’t seen the movie, but from how you describe it as becoming so smart that it comes to have a mind of its own to start the human vs. robot war and compare it to the news wars you predict, I also think it’s a bit extreme, but it is possible. With wikitorials, the publication/reader interaction becomes that much closer and I can see why publications would want to create them. It draws in readers as well as encourages them to participate. But I think that they do have to be careful with what they wikitorialize and how they present them because, well, look at what happened to the LA Times. I think that it would strengthen traditional news reporting just in the fact that we as journalists can often miss things due to the way our minds are focused on the topic. It allows us to view the world as our readers see it and open our minds in a way that will better help us in our future reporting.
April 29, 2008 at 12:17 pm |
I think that bringing everyday readers into the news process will strengthen news reporting. In terms of local newspapers, it could add ownership or a greater sense of community to the paper and eliminate the elitist or exclusivity of traditional one-way communication through print journalism. But will this be efficient? Will it “dumb-down” the journalism profession? Will it provide a platform, like the LA Times experiment, for inappropriate material?
April 30, 2008 at 7:01 pm |
Thanks for the posts everyone. Samantha, loved the word “wikitorialize!” That makes me think that the dictionary will soon be making a change as well, as words like “wiki”, “wikitorialize,” etc. start to become much more prevalent in daily dialogue.
I agree with you all about strengthening the news reporting – introducing more writers into the writing and editorial process does allow better content with more “truth”, whatever that really is. But again, the LA Times editors took a positive human nature approach here, thinking that people wouldn’t listen to their lesser angels and write offensive or racial remarks, or post porn. I think that the wikitorial is a wonderful idea, but more controls needed to be added. For example, if they allowed a subscription model for the wikitorial, and anyone who paid to write would get the chance to write and have their name published on the Web site and in the newspaper. That way, aspiring journalists would have a clip.
Jason, I graduate in June so I’ll have plenty of time coming up to look into the Enders series – thanks!
May 1, 2008 at 10:19 am |
[...] The ‘public beta’ without the ‘right spirits’ (Lorin) [...]
May 1, 2008 at 10:45 am |
Like lorin said, my favorite part about this entire thread is the word “wikitorialize.” Can we please make it a goal it invent more words during class this quarter?
May 1, 2008 at 10:47 am |
I think the notion of using the wikitorial as a kind of break-in point is very interesting. I like the fact rather than abandoning old forms of media it really creates a bridge. If bloggers who subscribed did get a byline in a major or local paper than would could start to see a melting of ideas, ethics, etc. that people seem to be most concerned with in this class.
May 1, 2008 at 10:49 am |
Lorin, I agree with you in saying that the LA Times editors had the right idea with trying to include readers. They were doing it in hopes to appeal to people’s better sides and neglected to think of the not so great side. If they added more control over the posts they would definitely be able to utilize this new technology to best of their benefits. This has the potential to become something really great for journalism and I hope that what happened with the LA Times doesn’t discourage other publications from going for it!
May 1, 2008 at 10:52 am |
I agree with Lorin that “truth” is subjective. And also that the creators of wikitorials have a long way to go in standardizing, filtering, controling their medium. Still, I commend the LA Times for beleiving in the good of humanity with this experiment. The LA Times learned a good lesson and can now try again… They will probably fail again, but hey, third times a charm!