So, Ed was just re-reading this rather interesting article from the American Journalism Review about Wikipedia and how media writers, reporter, and editors use it today. The story focuses mostly on how the internet, user-edited encyclopedia has been affecting newspapers, but Ed knows it's undeniably an issue that pops up in magazine offices everyday. (There's this funny reference to magazines, too: "And when Time Inc. Editor-in-Chief John Huey was asked how his staffers made sure their stories were correct, he jokingly responded, 'Wikipedia.'") In fact, Ed often goes to Wikipedia first when he's doing research for a story. Not that he ever uses any of the information without confirming elsewhere, but it's a good place to start. Its broad, often seemingly random information can be helpful as an overview. Don't know anything about solar power? How to weave a basket? The chemistry of hair dye? You can quickly find out and also figure out where to get the legit information.
But, as we all know, information on Wikipedia can be wrong or made-up. Ed knew an editorial assistant who used Wikipedia to confirm movie release dates for a calendar page one time. When her editor found out—at the very last minute, of course—she was floored. The chance of that information being correct wasn't good at all. You don't want people showing up for Indiana Jones a week early!
So Ed has questions for you all: How do you use Wikipedia when writing or assigning stories? Do you go there daily? Does your research department have an official policy about the use of Wikipedia and what is it? (Or maybe the question is: Do you even have a research department anymore? And if the answer is now, is there an increased use of Wikipedia because of that?) Can you use Wikipedia as a source in a story as long as you cite it? Do you think most folks in the magazine industry—most of all, interns and less experienced people—understand that Wikipedia is not a totally reliable source? Speak up, Edsters!
To the truth (or almost truth) of Wikipedia,
Ed
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
As an ME, one of my duties is to manage our fact-checkers and double-check/accept/reject their changes. During their training, I always stress that Wikipedia, while helpful for getting a basic run-down on a topic, is never a credible source. If I see it cited, I ask the fact-checker or writer to find another source. To me, printing "facts" I'm not confident in isn't worth risking the magazine's (or my!) reputation. Gotta love that "random article" button, though!
I think Wikipedia is great but it is important to be aware that it's content is user-generated. I usually use it when I don't know anything about a subject and I need some kind of background information. I would never use it as an actual source but as a jumping off point for more detailed research.
It's just so hard because Wikipedia comes up first most of the time in Google search. In school we're not allowed to use Wikipedia, and if we do we have to back it up with another source.
As a writer, I use Wikipedia A LOT to learn about things that I would otherwise have no way of knowing about (like zooplankton, which actually came up this morning), but I would never use it as a first and last source on any matter.
Wikipedia helps me find out that one artist and one song in that one commercial. Come on, you know the one I'm talking about!
But really, if my roommate and I are discussing something pop culture related, we usually resort to Wikipedia for more deets. For example, last night we were watching "So You Think You Can Dance." I couldn't remember the name of the first season's host (Lauren Sanchez, fyi). And we also wanted to know what Cat Deeley did before she was the host (a former fashion model, if you were wondering). Now, the Fox Web site probably wouldn't have had that information. So in quick minute research for useless knowledge, Wikipedia is my main man.
Wikipedia is sooo easy. TOO EASY. Real research and true fact finding is never that easy, imo. It was fine to use wikipedia in middle school. But now if you have all "shady/maybe/might be" facts in your 11th grade U.S. History paper, you FAIL.
Post a Comment