Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Editorial Wiki Debuts At LA Times

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the edit-this-page dept.

jgarzik writes "The L.A. Times newspaper has launched a new form of editorial, the wikitorial. The LA Times editorial staff introduces the new feature in this editorial, and the first wikitorial, War and Consequences , has already been posted. Is this an innovative new way to interact with readers, or will it be constantly defaced by reactionaries?"

4 of 190 comments (clear)

  1. Re:You have two choices... by jfengel · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, I have an account at latimes.com, and I don't think I get any email from them at all. (I used a tracking address, so I'd know if it was from them.)

    I'm sure you lose your soul if you register, just like when you get your picture taken, but at least thus far they haven't sent me any spam.

    Interestingly, if you want to participate in the wiki, that's a different sign-up. But at least the regular latimes.com sign-in appears to generate no spam.

  2. Wikitorial Fork by emerge-ant · · Score: 3, Informative

    The project has already been forked, by Jimmy Wales himself, by starting a counterpoint editorial. Making room for different viewpoints may stave off edit wars. But the real issue is Terms and Conditions inherited from print.

  3. It's closed by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Looks like the LA Times decided their experiment wasn't working after a few vandals decided to deface it with porn and goatsex images.

    Before that, it was a back and forth between various camps pushing their viewpoint or trying to keep a more neutral tone to the editorial.

    Now what is interesting is the google cache has one version of the wiki - making it appear to be the consensus version when it is only one of many edited versions. Which means, unless you cache every edit, Google will not provide a very robust view of the dialogue inherent in a Wiki; yet people will view their cache as authoritative.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
  4. Re:Actionist vs. reactionist by volkris · · Score: 2, Informative

    WMD was not proven false. In fact, it would be very difficult to prove false, as that would require someone to figure out what the Iraqis did with their stockpiles of WMD. After ten years of dodging the question I doubt it will be discovered anytime soon.

    Terrorist ties were also not proven false. In fact, as the US swept through Iraqi officials' offices they discovered more and more documentary evidence linking Iraq to terrorists.