Editorial Wiki Debuts At LA Times

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?"

Comments

Is this really necessary for news editorials?

[rune2]

I would think that comments to a news editiorial would do pretty much the same thing. What's the benefit of being able to edit someone else's opinion?

Re:Is this really necessary for news editorials?

[N3Roaster]

What's the benefit of being able to edit someone else's opinion?

Personally, I would love to be able to edit the opinions of others so long as others don't get to edit mine. Especially useful would be if those changes propagated back to the brain of the original opinion author.

Wrong question

[Psychic Burrito]

What's currently important is not the question of "will it be defaced?", but "will it help removing some of the trenches that are in the US public opinion? Will it add positively to a constructive dialogue between the people?"

I think that it will not, because the predominant circles active on the internet today fall pretty nicely in line with the LA Times readership, so there are not that many dialogues between the rivaling parties. But add a editorial wiki to a bible belt newspaper, and there will surely be dialogue going on indeed.

My Reaction:

[The_Wilschon]

I'm off to go deface it right now!