I’ve come to the conclusion that the biggest problem driving low quality media is that it has been purely advertising supported, and that the social networks which provide so much distribution are also purely advertising supported. Facebook, Twitter and other social networks make revenue based on how long you stay on their site looking at and clicking on advertising. Engagement is prioritized over quality.
The new Wikitribune is a completely unique and slightly crazy idea: a collaboratively editable social networking new platform. As before, we will have no advertising and no paywall (There is a short waiting list to join the new site to help us with scaling up, but you can skip the waiting list if you invite people or if you become a paying supporter).
I’m really excited for WT:Social. If you want to join me over there, I created a Chrono.gg hub for us. Anyone who signs up with the following link will be automatically connected to one another:
Requires first and last name. Even if I could stand behind an attempt to battle the social giants like Twitter which seek only to control the masses through manipulation of data and using it to peer pressure others into hive mind like behavior, requiring people to present themselves as they are without security of a moniker is ludicrous. Dangerous even.
Am I wrong in this, or is it really open for everyone to see?
Interesting idea, but I’m certainly not a fan if they require shedding anonymity to participate. The text fields may be labeled first and last name but one should be able to put whatever into them, not sure what controls or verification they apply beyond the first front page though.
Also considering that wikipedia itself long has had and still does have a problem with political bias inserted into articles, from moderators to straight up governmental tampering. I’m not sure how well this will turn out.
Well I signed up and immediately it decided that I was friends with and followed Coraline. Were those referral links? Or is it because I joined the chrono.gg group?
Another “interesting” thing I’m seeing here. The site gives you 3 different referral links for Colleagues, family members and friends. Why is this site trying to map out my social circle like this?
They claim they’re not going to be selling my information to anyone. But they certainly seem rather keen on collecting as much of it as they can. Collecting info for a financial reason is one thing, but collecting it for NO reason now that starts making conspiracy alarm bells go off in my head… now where’s my tinfoil.
@Rhyagelle & @Fraggles “Coraline Castell” is not my birth name. It’s the alias I use online and also what I used at WT:Social, as you can see per my link above.
Please source your claim here! I’m interested in reading more.
Referral links as I stated on OP.
First and foremost, their FAQ:
Their full data transparency statement:
Personally, I think 1) you don’t need to share your “family,” “work,” or “friends” referral links. You can just file a new referral link under your profile – like I did with my Chrono.gg link above. 2) circles might be useful for companies or groups of family members who want to be automatically connected. WT:S is an alternative to fake news dispersed by Facebook and Twitter but it’s also a social network, so it wants to know your social circles to do its job as such.
Well if you trust wikipedia to accurately list their own mistakes and problems you can find some they recognize themselves here Reliability of Wikipedia - Wikipedia
Of course wikipedia finds that wikipedia works hard and quickly to remove any erroneous edits very quickly. Except when they don’t.
Curious: what sources you trust? Personally I use my local news site for my own news and Reuters and AP for international news. I felt that imo Reuters is a bit biased on US politics but the rest of the world is surprisingly solid. But that’s just me, I know we should use more than one source for information.
