WEBVTT - The Wiki Elite

0:00:03.640 --> 0:00:07.440
<v Speaker 1>When Wikipedia launched, it was supposed to represent the democratization

0:00:07.480 --> 0:00:10.600
<v Speaker 1>of information, but a recent study shows that the majority

0:00:10.600 --> 0:00:14.120
<v Speaker 1>of content comes from just one percent of the site's editors.

0:00:14.440 --> 0:00:21.360
<v Speaker 1>I'm Jonathan Strickland, and this is tex Stuff Daily. Back

0:00:21.360 --> 0:00:24.439
<v Speaker 1>in two thousand, the administrators for a new reference site

0:00:24.480 --> 0:00:28.159
<v Speaker 1>called Newpedia. We're running into a problem. Their strategy was

0:00:28.200 --> 0:00:31.680
<v Speaker 1>to create an online encyclopedia consisting of articles written by

0:00:31.720 --> 0:00:35.240
<v Speaker 1>experts and vetted with a peer review process. But there

0:00:35.440 --> 0:00:40.400
<v Speaker 1>was just one problem. That process was really slow. In

0:00:40.440 --> 0:00:44.480
<v Speaker 1>its first six months, the site published precisely two articles,

0:00:45.080 --> 0:00:48.280
<v Speaker 1>not two million, or two thousand, or even two hundred,

0:00:48.720 --> 0:00:52.880
<v Speaker 1>just two. Laurence Sanger, one of the co founders of Newpedia,

0:00:53.120 --> 0:00:56.320
<v Speaker 1>thought that by launching a complementary site in which anyone

0:00:56.400 --> 0:00:59.800
<v Speaker 1>could submit articles free of editorial review, might help take

0:00:59.840 --> 0:01:03.680
<v Speaker 1>some of the pressure off nupedia. On January two thousand one,

0:01:03.920 --> 0:01:07.000
<v Speaker 1>Wikipedia launched. By the end of its first year, it

0:01:07.120 --> 0:01:12.200
<v Speaker 1>boasted twenty thousand articles. Sanger's philosophy was that by allowing

0:01:12.240 --> 0:01:15.520
<v Speaker 1>anyone and everyone to contribute, Wikipedia could ramp up to

0:01:15.560 --> 0:01:19.000
<v Speaker 1>become a record of pretty much all human knowledge. Experts

0:01:19.040 --> 0:01:22.760
<v Speaker 1>could contribute or tweak articles that might contain inaccuracies, the

0:01:22.880 --> 0:01:26.960
<v Speaker 1>cream would rise to the top. In practice, Wikipedia had

0:01:26.959 --> 0:01:30.039
<v Speaker 1>a few other issues to contend with. The open nature

0:01:30.080 --> 0:01:32.640
<v Speaker 1>of the platform meant that people could make both positive

0:01:32.880 --> 0:01:37.000
<v Speaker 1>or negative changes to content. Articles on sensitive subjects became

0:01:37.040 --> 0:01:40.760
<v Speaker 1>battlegrounds for different ideologies, and some people just found it

0:01:40.800 --> 0:01:44.520
<v Speaker 1>amusing to vandalize articles in various ways. It became clear

0:01:44.600 --> 0:01:47.400
<v Speaker 1>that the open policy needed a few more guidelines to

0:01:47.480 --> 0:01:50.920
<v Speaker 1>keep things orderly. Sanger created the first set of these

0:01:50.960 --> 0:01:53.560
<v Speaker 1>guidelines in two thousand two, and a sizeable group of

0:01:53.640 --> 0:01:56.320
<v Speaker 1>volunteer editors did their best to make sure those rules

0:01:56.320 --> 0:02:00.480
<v Speaker 1>were followed. These rules required reference citations for factual statements

0:02:00.480 --> 0:02:03.800
<v Speaker 1>and articles, and avoidance of bias or opinion and pieces,

0:02:03.840 --> 0:02:06.600
<v Speaker 1>and some general guides on what is and isn't considered

0:02:06.600 --> 0:02:10.280
<v Speaker 1>to be relevant information for any given subject. Over time,

0:02:10.440 --> 0:02:13.560
<v Speaker 1>the process for writing and editing content on Wikipedia has

0:02:13.600 --> 0:02:17.080
<v Speaker 1>grown more bureaucratic. This may contribute to the problem of

0:02:17.120 --> 0:02:21.000
<v Speaker 1>a relatively small number of editors contributing more than of

0:02:21.080 --> 0:02:24.640
<v Speaker 1>all content. A two thousand thirteen m I T Technology

0:02:24.680 --> 0:02:27.960
<v Speaker 1>Review article concluded that the red tape editors had to

0:02:28.000 --> 0:02:31.280
<v Speaker 1>navigate to be active on Wikipedia meant fewer editors would

0:02:31.320 --> 0:02:34.520
<v Speaker 1>stick around. The article cited a decline and editors who

0:02:34.520 --> 0:02:37.600
<v Speaker 1>had more than ten edits to their accounts. A piece

0:02:37.639 --> 0:02:40.840
<v Speaker 1>on Motherboard states that the top one percent of editors

0:02:40.840 --> 0:02:45.120
<v Speaker 1>at Wikipedia has a pretty high turnover rate. Of that

0:02:45.200 --> 0:02:48.920
<v Speaker 1>top one percent changes every five weeks or so. Wikipedia

0:02:48.960 --> 0:02:51.720
<v Speaker 1>has struggled with getting more active editors involved since the

0:02:51.800 --> 0:02:54.519
<v Speaker 1>mid two thousand's. The New York Times published a piece

0:02:54.560 --> 0:02:58.600
<v Speaker 1>in two thousand fifteen titled can Wikipedia Survive? The article

0:02:58.680 --> 0:03:03.440
<v Speaker 1>identified a different threat to Wikipedia mobile devices. Now, the

0:03:03.480 --> 0:03:06.520
<v Speaker 1>online world in general has struggled with the rise of

0:03:06.560 --> 0:03:09.360
<v Speaker 1>web traffic from mobile devices. It can be challenging to

0:03:09.400 --> 0:03:12.560
<v Speaker 1>serve up mobile advertising, and web advertising is still a

0:03:12.600 --> 0:03:15.560
<v Speaker 1>major source of revenue for web based sites and services,

0:03:15.560 --> 0:03:19.240
<v Speaker 1>but that was not the problem the article was focusing on. Instead,

0:03:19.320 --> 0:03:22.160
<v Speaker 1>it was all about how mobile devices aren't ideal if

0:03:22.160 --> 0:03:24.560
<v Speaker 1>you want to write up an article or make extensive

0:03:24.639 --> 0:03:28.560
<v Speaker 1>changes to content, it's inconvenient and cumbersome to use a

0:03:28.600 --> 0:03:31.160
<v Speaker 1>mobile device compared to the good old mouse and keyboard

0:03:31.160 --> 0:03:34.480
<v Speaker 1>of desktop and laptop computers. The New York Times argued

0:03:34.520 --> 0:03:37.960
<v Speaker 1>that the shift in web experiencement fewer people were comfortable

0:03:38.120 --> 0:03:43.240
<v Speaker 1>performing research writing and editing in general. The periodical The

0:03:43.280 --> 0:03:46.280
<v Speaker 1>Guardian had its own response to this and acknowledge that

0:03:46.440 --> 0:03:50.320
<v Speaker 1>editing on Wikipedia isn't easy for many reasons. First, just

0:03:50.480 --> 0:03:53.080
<v Speaker 1>using the markup language to make changes to the site

0:03:53.280 --> 0:03:56.800
<v Speaker 1>is tough. There's a learning curve to properly navigating the code.

0:03:57.160 --> 0:03:59.960
<v Speaker 1>Beyond that, the Guardian pointed out that editors can sometimes

0:04:00.080 --> 0:04:03.040
<v Speaker 1>feel a great deal of ownership regarding some articles, and

0:04:03.080 --> 0:04:06.360
<v Speaker 1>if you feel passionately about the content in them, making

0:04:06.360 --> 0:04:09.080
<v Speaker 1>a change to that content can be met with resistance,

0:04:09.360 --> 0:04:12.600
<v Speaker 1>and so being an editor on Wikipedia often entails arguing

0:04:12.600 --> 0:04:18.000
<v Speaker 1>for changes, defending editorial decisions, and navigating an increasingly complex

0:04:18.040 --> 0:04:21.440
<v Speaker 1>framework of rules. The Guardian article goes further still and

0:04:21.560 --> 0:04:24.520
<v Speaker 1>argues that the barriers to editing on Wikipedia are so

0:04:24.640 --> 0:04:27.800
<v Speaker 1>high that only a really motivated person would go through

0:04:27.839 --> 0:04:31.160
<v Speaker 1>the trouble of doing it. Further, the article states those

0:04:31.200 --> 0:04:33.880
<v Speaker 1>who have the most motivation tend to be those with

0:04:33.960 --> 0:04:38.680
<v Speaker 1>an agenda, and frequently include dishonest or manipulative individuals. On

0:04:38.720 --> 0:04:41.760
<v Speaker 1>the academic front, Wikipedia has been the frequent target of

0:04:41.800 --> 0:04:45.920
<v Speaker 1>scholarly scorn. Because articles are by their nature changeable, it's

0:04:45.960 --> 0:04:49.839
<v Speaker 1>problematic to cite a Wikipedia article. In research, there's no

0:04:49.920 --> 0:04:52.279
<v Speaker 1>guarantee that the information you are citing will be there

0:04:52.279 --> 0:04:54.960
<v Speaker 1>in the future, and because there have been some high

0:04:54.960 --> 0:04:58.119
<v Speaker 1>profile cases of people with a specific agenda to push

0:04:58.200 --> 0:05:01.919
<v Speaker 1>altering Wikipedia articles to a line with that agenda, the

0:05:02.040 --> 0:05:05.920
<v Speaker 1>veracity of information found in Wikipedia can also come under suspicion.

0:05:06.360 --> 0:05:09.599
<v Speaker 1>There's also a touch of elitism in some criticisms directed

0:05:09.600 --> 0:05:13.080
<v Speaker 1>towards Wikipedia. Some of the longest articles by word count

0:05:13.120 --> 0:05:17.760
<v Speaker 1>are for seemingly inconsequential topics, for example, figures in pop culture,

0:05:18.080 --> 0:05:22.520
<v Speaker 1>whereas more traditionally revered subject matter such as a historical figure,

0:05:22.760 --> 0:05:26.520
<v Speaker 1>may have comparatively fewer words dedicated to them. I see

0:05:26.560 --> 0:05:29.440
<v Speaker 1>no indication that Wikipedia is going to fade away in

0:05:29.480 --> 0:05:32.320
<v Speaker 1>the near future, and maybe that the number of editors

0:05:32.320 --> 0:05:34.760
<v Speaker 1>will decrease to a select few willing to pick their

0:05:34.760 --> 0:05:37.880
<v Speaker 1>way through the rules and code to grow Wikipedia, and

0:05:38.000 --> 0:05:40.640
<v Speaker 1>perhaps in the end we'll find ourselves with a compendium

0:05:40.640 --> 0:05:43.040
<v Speaker 1>of knowledge closer to what the founders wanted when they

0:05:43.040 --> 0:05:47.280
<v Speaker 1>first launched Newpedia years ago. To learn more about Wikipedia

0:05:47.320 --> 0:05:50.200
<v Speaker 1>and all other topics in tech, subscribe to the tech

0:05:50.240 --> 0:05:53.039
<v Speaker 1>Stuff podcast. That's my long form show in which I

0:05:53.120 --> 0:05:56.000
<v Speaker 1>dive deep into all things technological to find out what's

0:05:56.040 --> 0:06:06.720
<v Speaker 1>really going on. I'll see you again soon won