[Wikipedia-l] Re: Jimbo interview on NPR Friday?

[Anthere]

David Gerard a écrit:
 > Stirling Newberry 
(stirling.newberry at xigenics.net) [050523 12:18]:
 >
 >>On May 22, 2005, at 8:24 PM, David Gerard wrote:
 >
 >
 >
 >>>Found it!
 >>>   http://www.radioopensource.org/2005/05/16/pilot-3-the-wikipedia/
 >>
 >
 >>The program in question is Christopher Lydon's new show "Open Source".
 >>Mr. Lydon is one of the most ardent advocates of the change that is
 >>taking place in our society, of which wikipedia is a part.
 >
 >
 >
 > Yep. It's a good show and Lydon's very clueful about the issues.
 >
 >
 > - d.

I personally would not call particularly clueful a journalist 
exclusively interested in the english speaking part of our project.

It strikes me as ... being a bit "short". But well, I suppose we can 
disagree on this.


I fear a bit being called anti-american for what I will say below, which 
would *really* be missing what I try to convey. So I hope you will do me 
the favor the read my comment with fairness.


My experience with the american press during the past year has been 
extremely unpleasant. If you listen to all the radio shows interviewing 
editors, it has been strictly restricted to english-speaking editors, so 
  usually only reporting on english experience, which is not necessarily 
the only representation *we* have of the project.

You might answer me "yes, but it would be a very bad idea to record a 
non-english editor, as likely, the audience would not understand well".

I agree. This is a very good point, and this is one of the explanations 
I got. But unfortunately, the english restriction is largely true in 
written articles as well. At best, journalists interview you, but put 
nothing in the article; at worse, they are just not interested in non 
english at all.


A couple of times, I tried to insist a little bit, trying to explain how 
our project international was, and how reducing it was to only talk to 
only one of our local community, while so many editors are able to speak 
enough english to be understood (I am not too good and I guess I would 
not be very understandable on a radio stuff, but others non-english do 
really have high quality language, and these guys were recommanded... 
but not contacted). I regret to say that the answer I generally got was 
"yes, but talking of the other languages do not interest our audience".

What would you answer to that ?

It is just a vicious circle. The journalist does not talk about 
something because he thinks no one will be interested. But since no one 
knows about it, no one even imagine he could be interested.


The consequence of this is essentially a very non neutral report, a very 
unfair description of what our project really is in most 
english-speaking press. The worse for me I think in the past year, has 
been to hear a french journalist telling me "but what does a french 
person do on the board of an english project ???". That day, I thought 
"God, are we SO bad in conveying WHAT we are doing and WHO our editors 
are ? Should not we HIRE a communication specialist ???"


Press may essentially report on two issues. Sometimes, they focus on our 
goal. But most of the time, they focus on trying to understand and make 
understood how we are organised to be able to build this resource together.


For those who talk about the goal :
I think our goal is largely missed when press forget the non-english. It 
is missed because what we try to do is to build up a resource to be 
usable by the largest number of people on Earth. And *this*, we can in 
particular do in "talking" (writing) to people in their *mother* language.

So, press talking of our goal without explaining how the project is 
being built in other languages, or how we succeed to coordinate as a 
multilingual project, IS JUST MISSING THE POINT.


For those who talk about the community and how it works :
Talking about our organisation in one project is one approach. But a 
little one. There is also the whole challenge in all working together as 
a multilinguistic community. There would also be the interest of talking 
of wikicommons, or how all languages share the same room together.


*We*, as a global community, made huge progress in having all languages 
collaborating in the past months. Internally, we did a great job.

Externally, it is just plain bad. We are not perceived as we should be 
perceived.

I regret that deeply. I tried to work on this, but I fear I just met a 
wall :-(

---------

And David, in case you tell me "but he mentionned we are a multilingual 
project", yes, it is true. 30 mn radio show never fails to take 5 
seconds to mention it. 7 pages articles such as the wired article never 
fails to use up a line to mention it. I doubt it has much impact on the 
listener or the reader in most cases.

So... while the interviews are really good (and you were indeed), I am 
not so certain Lydon is very clueful about "the issues".



Anthere


Jeee, I feel better now that I said that... because it weighted on my 
stomach very much :-)