Journalists write better articles than amateurs shocker
Wired today published an article about wikis that had been written in-house but edited over the course of a week via a public wiki. Original author Ryan Singel gives credit to the many contributors who added information, links and explanation to his article, and admits that the final version was “more accurate and more representative of how wikis are used.”
But was it better? Err, well, no. “The edits over the week lack some of the narrative flow that a Wired News piece usually contains. The transitions seem a bit choppy, there are too many mentions of companies, and too much dry explication of how wikis work. It feels more like a primer than a story to me,” says Singel.
No big surprise there. Much as I love blogging and reading blogs, citizen journalism is no substitute for the traditional media with professional writers, editors and codes of conduct. Call me old-fashioned, but when I want facts I can trust presented in a digestible format, I’ll still turn to a traditional publication.
You can check out the original article here.
Entry filed under: Media.