Keeping News of David Rohde’s Kidnapping Off Wikipedia - NYTimes.comFirst Faved : Jun 30 2009 by derekFaved : 1 time with noteViewed : 11 timesFave It!
Faves for this Web page
- derek - Jun 30 2009 | news, wikipedia, journalism
Quoted: The New York Times asked Jimmy Wales, a co-founder of Wikipedia, for his help when David Rohde was kidnapped and the news was being posted.
Votes for this web page
Already a user? Sign In
Add a Fave for this Web page
- What happens when I press Publish?
- Your Fave for this Web page gets shared with the Faves community. You can access it at any time by selecting "My Faves" from the menu above.
- Why do you ask for my email address?
- We use your email address to create an account, so you can easily find your Fave again at a later time.
Related Content from Around Faves
journalism
-
1 FaverViewed: 11 TimesQuoted: The New York Times asked Jimmy Wales, a co-founder of Wikipedia, for his help when David Rohde was kidnapped and the news was being posted.
- shiwani - Apr 16 20091 FaverViewed: 13 Times
- shiwani - Jan 06 20094 FaversViewed: 12 Times
news
-
Hm, I had no idea there was a huge toxic waste site in Washington state.
1 FaverViewed: 10 TimesQuoted: If you want to win the stimulus sweepstakes, it helps to have one of the planet's nastiest toxic waste sites in your back yard.
- talios - 3 days ago1 FaverViewed: 148 Times
- shiwani - 3 days ago1 FaverViewed: 6 Times
This is so fascinating -- thanks for sharing. I think about this a lot between my job and my freelance writing, and I know that many readers don't stop to think about the implications of their comments before posting them to the Internet -- they just want to be first to make a point or break the news.
On balance, I think user-generated content is a good thing -- and we've seen the best of it come out of situations like the political tumult in Iran. But there are few rules about the ethics of this. Back in the days of print, you'd purposefully select the most thoughtful/compelling critiques and comments about something and publish those. Obviously, that's an obsolete model now. But does that mean that editors of sites -- whether it's Wikipedia or the New York Times -- are being anti-democratic by exerting some control over what gets published?
I sincerely hope the person in Florida trying to edit the page saw this article and feels like a jackass for so adamantly trying to be the source of breaking news.