John Seigenthaler Sr. is a regular visitor of Wikipedia, which came as a surprise to me. To my knowledge, he was the first veteran journalist to speak out against Wikipedia for its flaws after discovering his biography entry contained false statements.

Yet, three years after that ordeal, in a 40 minute conversation which you can listen to here, Seigenthaler said he “make(s) it a point to visit Wikipedia almost everyday.”

“For communicators, there are enduring values that deserve standing in the new world of cyberspace,” Seigenthaler said during a lecture to over 300 people in a crowded theater on the campus of Middle Tennessee State University. “I am a traditional journalist. But, each day I Google, I Digg. I know that everything that is del.icio.us is not necessarily tasty… I now visit Wikipedia in search of errors.”

Seigenthaler opened and closed his speech by referencing a quote from Alexander Hamilton that warned against the notion that the bill of rights would protect our freedoms. Instead, he said, it would depend on the community of people who fight for those freedoms. The false statements and defamatory language found in the history pages of Wikipedia entries are a liability if left uncorrected and/or deleted.

“Without self-policing we are in danger of a government whose tradition and nature is to regulate technology it does not understand and technology where criticism is unaccountably expressed,” Seigenthaler said.

On a global level, the practice of self-policing has had a degree of success. My perspective comes from the local level. I don’t see many of the old print media people coming around to the idea that they no longer cover beats as journalists and instead those journalists are simply the most vocal members in the community.

Although, if the best of us have determined social communities are essential to the future of better reporting, maybe there is hope.

I recorded the entire lecture and hope to post it on here soon. If you have time to listen, I’d highly recommend it.

Open source reporting isn’t defined, but that hasn’t stopped the majority of journalists and mass media scholars from trying. This post will not be another one of those commentaries —- it’s about Muppets.

Ok, it’s mostly about the Muppet Wikia, which is a collection of information created entirely by fans who update it regularly. Now I don’t care about the half Monster, half puppet Jim Henson creation, but there are obviously plenty of others that do care about it passionately enough to write passages, tidbits and “quality articles.” I’m using this example because it was what Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales cited in a recent lecture I attended, (listen to it here.)

The Muppet Wikia is also just one example of a newly emerging medium: the Wikia. The Wikia functions almost identically to Wikipedia. Those who chose to download the source code for their own Wikia have options to alter various settings. Basically, it can be tailor made to fit your needs.

A Wikia on virtually any subject can exist with a community if there is pre existing history about the said subject. Something with constantly updating news would require an entire staff…

…Now, why aren’t local newspapers using this to create a public record of the area they cover? Editors on staff would become the administrators while the journalists would be the most vocal members of this community.

A local newspaper branded Wikia would certainly remedy the difficulty in connecting with their community. You need to allow this community to dictate the content so long as it is unbiased, cites credible sources for new statements, and upholds the same integrity newspapers have always tried to have.

It’s also worth mentioning that the source code is completely free —- A big plus for newspapers running on a shoestring budget.

So I ask again, why am I not seeing more newspaper Wikias?