Wikitorials coming from the Los Angeles Times—but, wait, how about wikens?
You can annotate the New York Times through Blogrunner’s independent service. But suppose you could actually rewrite the editorials. That’s what “wikitorials” at the L.A. Times site will apparently let you do. This is a hypercreative idea as long as the newspaper makes its true opinions known rather than just letting readers decide. For once, the dinos could be ahead of the mammals. Now–if only the typical paper can start letting readers comment on news stories on the same pages!
In fact, I can envision letting readers rewrite and augment news stories, with the authorship being made clear, not just through text but through graphics. Now that would be true participatory journalism. Imagine an entire edition molded precisely by the individual reader. The edition could offer (1) “straight” news stories on reader-specified topics, (2) certain stories filtered through the reader’s favorite rewriters/bloggers, and (3) sidebars so no one would lose track of headlines from the “straight” paper. If readers wanted the “straight” versions of the individual rewrites, they could toggle them back in, either as a group or individually. Heresy? Damn right. But it’s one way for the dinos to survive. Most people will want to read news the usual way, but not always. Besides, some of the rewriters just might turn out to be a hidden pool of talent and end up as regular writers.
Constructive response to blogs
On top of that, this would be a constructive response to the blog world. Readers wouldn’t have to go to blogs as often for their preferred “take”–they could get it from the custom-made editions that could even pick up content from independent blogs chosen by readers via RSS addresses, not just locally hosted blogs. At the same time, via text and graphics, the rewritten and imported news would be carefully distinguished from the in-house professional variety. In fact, “news” might be the wrong word. Newspapers could position the rewrites and blog items as opinion pieces.
And the name for the above? A wikdition or, if you prefer, a wiken. And, yes, just like the regular editions, the wikens would carry ads. They would reach far, far more people than typical blogs and generate new advertising revenue for papers, who would pick up people tired of the usual MSM approach. The end result, given all the options available, especially the content from entirely outside the newspaper, would be cross between an old-fashioned paper and just a bunch of RSS headlines. But, editorially (via the sidebar with the regular headlines, as well as the option to toggle in “straight” stories to replace the outside opinion) and financially (via the accompanying ads), the reader would still very much be on the turf of the MSM paper.
The control angle
Would the MSMers be willing to give up that much control? Hard to say. But in an era when news people are among the most enthusiastic users of RSS readers for their own purposes, something needs to happen. In this era “custom” isn’t enough. “Participatory” will often matter as well. In fact, if I were the NYT, or the LA Times, or the Washington Post, I would start my own annotated edition immediately and work toward genuine wikens. Don’t gripe about Blogrunner. Try to outrun ‘em with your wikens–true rewrites, not just annotations alone. I hope someone’s listening out there in Media Land. We need both dinos and mammals. The old days are gone. One story doesn’t fit all. And existing customization possibilities in the MyWashingtonPost.com vein just don’t go far enough, in that they more or less just let you shuffle around standard MSM fare. People really want a hybrid–the excitement of ‘tudy blogs and the often-but-not-always-more-reliable MSM. No wonder software like Great News is winning fans.
Source of idea
I’m not certain if the above idea has been floated before (am I thinking of something in Dan Gillmor’s book?). Whatever, it’s worth exploring.
Note: Nothing against Blogrunner. I love ‘em. In fact, I wrote the above partly to show how outside services, rather than being targets for lawyers, can actually serve as R&D for the companies with the source content. If the Times does a Blogrunner act, you can be certain that the actual Blogrunner will respond with new ingenuity.
Related: Wikinews.
Update: Ernie Miller says he hates the L.A. Times’ idea. One of his commenters even thinks that the Times is trying to discredit wikis. I’ve replied to the skeptics. While the Times may indeed be trying make wikis look bad, I’d like to give ‘em the benefit of the doubt at this point.
On another matter, I see that the word “wiken” exists–but as a marketing agency’s name rather than a newspaper term. One alternative if the lawyers protest: a “wik-ed” (pronounced “wicked”).
Update, June 14, 1:06 p.m.: Tweaks made, especially in description of reader-customized edition. Also see a recently posted item arguing that the community approach draws higher readership than a tops-down one.
(Via Dan Gillmor’s item on Bayosphere.)
Leave a Reply