Wikipedia: Trusting Those You Don’t Know
Unless your company name has the word “Encyclopedia” in it you probably are thinking PUNT on this post. Hold on. There is a smidge of truth here for all of us. This documentary … while a bit long in the tooth … is an example of how todays consumers are taking more control of the ‘truth’ and not just listening to a minority of company sponsored experts. Instead they are putting more stock in their friends … and … people they don’t know. They trust the crowd more than they trust the corporate experts. Strange but true.
As usual my raw notes are below, but here are the thoughts that jumped out at me as I ran (i.e. jogged) along.
| Webcast Details | Notable Points |
Title/Link:
Documentary released at NextWeb in Amsterdam. Duration:
Recommend to Watch? No, No, No
|
1. So Bauer, what about Trust and Brand?
2. So what, Wikipedia <> My Business
3. It’s worse than Wikipedia … The “Truth” Isn’t In One Place
4. Time To Pilot New Styles of Marketing
|
So, what was rather a boring Documentary evolved into something that had many hidden messages. It was interesting to see how Wikipedia is just another place where the question “What defines who is an expert?” and “Who can I trust?” hasn’t been answered. In my view, if we can enable our customer to find trusted advisors, regardless of affiliation to us, we will earn that trust ourselves.
** START OF RAW SCRIBBLE TAKEN WHILE RUNNING **
http://thenextweb.org/2008/04/08/video-the-truth-according-to-wikipedia/
…………………………Author - IJsbrand van Veelen
………………………………………○ 4/14/2008, 6:13 AM
………………………………………○ Card catalog / library
………………………………………○ Larry Sanger - Co Founder Wikipedia (WP)
………………………………………○ What is the value of the information in wikipedia
………………………………………○ 4/14/2008, 6:15 AM
………………………………………○ Charles Leadbeater (CL) - Author “We Think”
……………………………………………………§ We Can, Need, Want
……………………………………………………§ Developing world the internet is the key to evolution
………………………………………○ Tim O’Reilly
……………………………………………………§ Web 2.0
……………………………………………………§ Second coming of web. Bust showed that movement of web to participation medium. How to harness users and participation to build services
……………………………………………………§ Conversation - not lecture
……………………………………………………§ Collaborate
……………………………………………………§ BAUER COMMENT - This is the big question in the flow it seems. How to use the www to enable business more than statically or extending systems.
………………………………………○ 4/14/2008, 6:18 AM
………………………………………○ Gathering of Wikipedian
……………………………………………………§ Talk about how people edit
………………………………………○ Back to CL - How WP started
……………………………………………………§ Wiki
……………………………………………………§ Saw possibility of creating an enclopedia
………………………………………○ Jimmy Wales - Co Founder WP
……………………………………………………§ Quick growth
……………………………………………………§ 8th most popular website
……………………………………………………§ English is primary
……………………………………………………§ Get it to India
………………………………………○ 4/14/2008, 6:23 AM
………………………………………○ Get it to South America
……………………………………………………§ BAUER COMMENT - VERY SLOW FLOW OF INFORMATION ON VIDEO
………………………………………○ 4/14/2008, 6:24 AM
………………………………………○ Andrew Keen -Author
……………………………………………………§ Point of guy who sees bad in www
……………………………………………………§ NEED, WANT, SHOULD, CAN ,FEAR (from prior speaker)
…………………………………………………………………□ I comes before all of these things
……………………………………………………§ More democracy, freedom, etc
…………………………………………………………………□ He disagrees
…………………………………………………………………□ Personalization and fragmenting of society moving into a “I” ‘Me” focus creates less democracy and freedom
……………………………………………………§ 2000 is the anti-60’s
……………………………………………………§ Social reform and commitment is where we need to be
…………………………………………………………………□ Challenge all forms of authority
…………………………………………………………………□ The hippies build the backbone of the www
……………………………………………………§ No one trusts authority
…………………………………………………………………□ However they represent a ‘counter-establishment’
…………………………………………………………………□ Who do you trust
………………………………………○ Back to CL - Quality of WP early
……………………………………………………§ Meant to be a content generation project not a publishing project
……………………………………………………§ Knew bad results would be the norm early
……………………………………………………§ Minority fought for ‘guiding principles’ of participatory internet (Web 2.0) … egalitarianism. Notion of anyone in authority being bad.
……………………………………………………§ BAUER COMMENT - So really the question here is WP’s oversight team
………………………………………○ Jimmy Wales - Positions
……………………………………………………§ So there is no one position … who decides
……………………………………………………§ Jimmy and CL seemed to break up … over the Wiki model (anyone being able to edit). CL wanted the authorization / validation of people
………………………………………○ Ndesho (archivist for Nigeria?)
……………………………………………………§ Ubuntu reference (in true form not OS … person w/o people around is not a person)
………………………………………○ 4/14/2008, 6:33 AM
………………………………………○ WP can’t be trusted
……………………………………………………§ At various points wiki can flux into marking up stuff
……………………………………………………§ Overview of topic and look at sources to reach final position
……………………………………………………§ So wiki is starting point
……………………………………………………§ Bauer Comment - That makes sense … enabling a drill through
……………………………………………………§ Research is people are lazy and they just go w/ WIKI
……………………………………………………§ Form core beliefs on things which are wrong
……………………………………………………§ Bauer comment - considering the full immersion of people in the stream they will get kicked around to shift from WP (if wrong in view of others) to other locations
………………………………………○ Back to CL
……………………………………………………§ Bauer comment - I suspect he is behind this video
……………………………………………………§ Assume there are no ‘right’ version
……………………………………………………§ That is bad
……………………………………………………§ There are experts
……………………………………………………§ There are reasons for gate keepers
………………………………………○ Encyclopedia Britannica (EB)
……………………………………………………§ They don’t see the point
……………………………………………………§ How can the masses be the right check/balance
……………………………………………………§ Game not reality
………………………………………○ Back to CL
……………………………………………………§ Spend free time … butt heads … experts vs masses … would they consider it
……………………………………………………§ There is no process for maximum accuracy prior to publish
……………………………………………………§ Key difference
……………………………………………………§ Comparison to submitting manuscripts and just binding up
……………………………………………………§ Bauer comment - he is discounting peer review process but there is a risk
………………………………………○ Andrew Keen
……………………………………………………§ Catastrophe
……………………………………………………§ Fragmentation of society, of nation state
……………………………………………………§ Replaced with individualized culture / identity
……………………………………………………§ Isolated from people … less collaboration
……………………………………………………§ Truth gets personalized
………………………………………○ Discussions in WP … that is where the various points come back
……………………………………………………§ Bauer comment - That is not well known
………………………………………○ 4/14/2008, 6:43 AM
………………………………………○ Andrew Keen
……………………………………………………§ Truth
……………………………………………………§ We are living in a surreal world
………………………………………○ JW - counters
……………………………………………………§ Can’t aspire to 100% accuracy
……………………………………………………§ However do you go w/ fluid … over static
……………………………………………………§ No way to tell difference
………………………………………○ Back to EB
……………………………………………………§ Someone else changes the points made
……………………………………………………§ Expert
………………………………………○ Counter
……………………………………………………§ Not bad to back and forth … you can see the various versions
………………………………………○ Tim O’Reilly
……………………………………………………§ Truth is hard to hit
……………………………………………………§ WP makes visible a process that happens slowly in print or in news or other mediums
……………………………………………………§ Media outlets are a spectrum of accuracy just like WP
………………………………………○ Back to AK
……………………………………………………§ Crowd say s is true
……………………………………………………§ Crowd likes web 2.0 … libertarianism
……………………………………………………§ Bauer comment - so who is on there bias’ the writing … but doesn’t that happen in any mass media outlet
………………………………………○ 4/14/2008, 6:48 AM
………………………………………○ Back to Archivist
……………………………………………………§ Web 2.0
……………………………………………………§ Enables expression of though across the world
……………………………………………………§ Bauer comment - what does that have to do w/ anything?
………………………………………○ Back to EB
……………………………………………………§ Truth is not democratic ..
……………………………………………………§ If it were … we would all know it
………………………………………○ LONG VISUAL
………………………………………○ AK - Book is –> Cult of the Amateur
……………………………………………………§ Idealize Innocent
……………………………………………………§ The less you know … the more you know … Oh Really?
……………………………………………………§ Cult existed in history … Jean Zach Trusso (sp?)
……………………………………………………§ Finally the cultists (today) they found a platform the innocence … it is the www
……………………………………………………§ Cult of amateur has found a home
……………………………………………………§ Bauer comment - is this sour grapes of those that were the experts seeing declining market share to the ‘amateur’
………………………………………○ CL - Problem is in people
………………………………………○ TO - WWW Standards
……………………………………………………§ AK was creating an angle to sell a book … no substance
………………………………………○ Back to AK
……………………………………………………§ I = Internet
……………………………………………………§ Culture of narcissi
……………………………………………………§ Intellectual Masturbation
……………………………………………………§ Learn about world by listening to experts
…………………………………………………………………□ Bauer comment - He has a point there … but how do you determine … however … can’t people self select experts … when you get into longer tail models where there are more … it is hard to point to one expert …
………………………………………○ 4/14/2008, 6:54 AM
………………………………………○ Www allows exploration of creativity in new ways … do it at greater scale
……………………………………………………§ Bauer comment great point — its not that the various people on www are experts … or talking new stuff … but doing the spin up from each others thought process
………………………………………○ Back to AK
……………………………………………………§ Take responsibility for how use
……………………………………………………§ 70M bloggers … why do people blog
……………………………………………………§ Good investment of time …
……………………………………………………§ No one is famous as bloggers
…………………………………………………………………□ Bauer comment - depends if you really know the blogger … but otherwise he is right … it’s a trust issue
………………………………………○ Back to TO
……………………………………………………§ The key is the movement to participation
……………………………………………………§ Not one way media anymore (books, tv)
……………………………………………………§ Now people go back and forth
……………………………………………………§ Isn’t that how old school research / innovation worked … talking and interacting w/ your peers? If so, the www just enables more frequent contact on your terms
………………………………………○ Back to AK
……………………………………………………§ Web 2.0 … winning
……………………………………………………§ Nothing inevitable about tech innovation
……………………………………………………§ How do we protect what we value … like Truth
…………………………………………………………………□ Bauer comment - I would reframe that to “TRUST”
……………………………………………………§ Next release will be cult of expert … due to amount of noise online
…………………………………………………………………□ Bauer comment - agree, however, how experts are determined will vary by person .. And will be far more broad … so there wont be 100 or 1000 .. There will be 10,000
………………………………………○ Archivist
……………………………………………………§ Experts are those are passionate about what they do
Subscribe
As a huge proponent (and user and contributor) to Wikipedia, this is a subject near and dear to my heart.
I’ll have to check out the documentary. (I like boring documentaries.)
Wired’s cover story last March dealt with some of the kind of trust building you’re talking about from a corporate perspective, talking about the way transparency (i.e. viewing the process) leads to more corporate trust. Interesting read.
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/15.04/wired40_ceo.html
John, that link was even better than the last. Keep that up and I’ll have to pay you to leave nuggets of wisdom.
The key I liked in that article was the discussion of RedFin (company that went after bringing transparency to the Real Estate market). I need to read that again a few more times and see if I can track down materials from that CEO.
Its interesting how the true issue, to me, is about a changing model of who you trust and how you establish that trust. Wikipedia is an example of trust via process but there are other non-systemic models. Take blogs. If someone consistently posts insight you build trust. If they ramble … you are out (trusted as a fool perhaps). If 5,000 bloggers in the social network you run in (to the point of your article on CEOs not being able to run from their reputation online) say you can’t be trusted (or just 100) you got a problem. Google will find that conversation and the majority voice will come to the top. Change is afoot it seems. Change is afoot.
How stale is it to bring up http://www.cluetrain.com/ in this context?
Even more so, the work done by the Learning Organizations people back in the 80s and 90s? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_organization
I worked with one of them one summer, George Por.
http://www.evolutionarynexus.org/blog/3
http://www.collectivewisdominitiative.org/files_people/Por_George.htm
One of the hippies who spawned the web, but also a successful business consultant. One morning he made the vow to dedicate his life to making as much information as available to as many people as possible.
Also, re your post, just got done reading Vernor Vinge’s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vernor_Vinge latest novel, Rainbows End. In a world set a few years in the future, to buy things online (in one of the many optional virtual overlays of the real world landscape) you go to “wikibay”. He dedicated the book to wikipedia and other current technologies. As you may know he’s credited with the ideas of cyberspace and the coming technological
singularity.
In hopes this comment does not diminish my blogosphere cred.
Great set of links Alex. My favorite was browsing the 3rd one (Collective Wisdom). I love the concept of people reaching a state of collaboration where they can truly get to a higher level of performance than in just a competitive setup.
I’ll have to check out that book “Rainbow’s End” … first I need to get the boys to turn in their late books.
[...] Wikipedia: Trusting Those You Don’t Know. I know that most understand Wikipedia is written by people you have no idea on … but reality is … most people don’t care that much … they just like that it (1) provides an answer (2) quickly and its (3) free. Plus its typically right on. Who can argue with that … no one … so pondering them isn’t lighting many peoples hair on fire. [...]
[...] Zuckerberg/Lacy Interview: Why people are still referring to it. This is a great drama where the facilitator of a keynote (Zuckerberg) gets ambushed by the [...]