Fascinating post today by Mitch Ratcliffe on a topic near and dear to me: facts, news and Wikipedia. Here’s a snippet from his concluding paragraphs:

If WikiNews editors acted as a peer-review committee and called out shortcomings in fact-checking or the accuracy of facts, this could be a powerful enhancement to multiple versions of events that helped the reader decide for themselves what actually happened. But reducing a report to a single version, especially based on contributions from people who were not actually there to record the event, is of questionable value.

It’s a long-ish, thoughtful post and I wish I didn’t have meetings all day so I could respond instead of just linking. I haven’t sorted out my thinking very well about these topics, as Urs Gasser pointed out to me yesterday, and Mitch’s post is helpful. (BTW, thank you, Urs.)

Categories: Uncategorized dw