<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories about &quot;wikifactcheck&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:19:08 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Journalism Professor Adds Wiki Sensibility To Crowdsourced Fact Checking: WikiFactCheck</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100817/03002810652.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100817/03002810652.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've talked about the public's <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100520/0153549505.shtml">desire</a> for more real fact checking, as opposed to he-said/she-said style news reporting.  And we've mentioned various programs that have brought <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100803/03501710471.shtml">crowdsourcing</a> into the fact-checking game.  And, now a USC journalism professor has put this all together <a href="http://www.niemanlab.org/2010/08/truth-o-meter-2g-andrew-lih-wants-to-wikify-fact-checking/?utm_source=feedburner&#038;utm_medium=feed&#038;utm_campaign=Feed%3A NiemanJournalismLab %28Nieman Journalism Lab%29" target="_blank">to create a fact-checking wiki-based site</a>, appropriately called <a href="http://www.wikifactcheck.org/wiki/Main_Page" target="_blank">WikiFactCheck</a>.
<br /><br />
Digging down to facts tends to be what crowdsourcing is good at.  The problem, of course, is that there often are some blurry lines around what is actually a "fact" and what is not.  But, given the (some would say excessive) cultural focus at Wikipedia on forcing a "neutral point of view," I could see how a similar group of people could somewhat vehemently focus in on specific facts that can be proven true or false, rather than getting too bogged down in opinion vs. facts debates.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100817/03002810652.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100817/03002810652.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100817/03002810652.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>that-seems-useful</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100817/03002810652</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>