My Problem with Wikinews is, that writing news is very time consuming
and old news ist rather worthless. So the balance is bad. That is
different to e.g. Wikipedia. A more collaborate way of writing news
could reduce the cost of writing news, but after publishing it is
loosing its worth still. What is old news for?
Sage Ross schrieb:
> On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 7:33 AM, David Gerard
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/may/07/rupert-murdoch-charging-websites
>>
>> Time for Wikinews to get recruiting ...
>>
>>
>> - d.
>>
>
> Maybe we should also try rethinking how Wikinews works, namely, by
> following Clay Shirky's advice for social media and "go where people
> are convening online, rather than starting a new place to convene".
> Wikinews isn't new, per se, but it's new to the great majority of
> established and potential citizen journalists out there. We need to
> find ways of bringing Wikinews--as an opportunity for collaboration,
> rather than finished product--to the places where real and potential
> citizen journalists convene.
>
> I blogged my thoughts in this vein a few days ago,
> http://ragesossscholar.blogspot.com/2009/05/rethinking-wikinews.html ,
> but I'm sure there are lots of other potential ways to make Wikinews a
> positive and significant force in this period of turmoil for
> journalism.
>
> -Sage (User:Ragesoss)
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
