Transparency

"Transparency, as used in the humanities, implies openness, communication, and accountability. It is a metaphorical extension of the meaning used in the physical sciences: a "transparent" object is one that can be seen through.

Transparency is introduced as a means of holding public officials accountable and fighting corruption. When government meetings are open to the press and the public, when budgets and financial statements may be reviewed by anyone, when laws, rules and decisions are open to discussion, they are seen as transparent and there is less opportunity for the authorities to abuse the system in their own interest."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparency_%28humanities%29

Media Transparency

"Media Transparency is the concept of determining how and why information is conveyed through various means.

This is a specific case of the topic, Transparency (humanities). As used in the humanities, it implies openness and accountability. It is a metaphorical extension of the meaning used in the physical sciences: a “transparent” object is one that can be seen through.

In communication studies, Media is transparent when:

* there are many, often competing, sources of information
* much is known about the method of information delivery
* the funding of media production is publicly available

Aspects of transparent media include open source documentation, open meetings, financial disclosure statements, the freedom of information legislation, budgetary review, audit, peer review, etc.

Some organizations and networks insist that not only the ordinary information of interest to the community is made freely available, but that all (or nearly all) meta-levels of organizing and decision-making are themselves also published. This is known as radical transparency. These organizations include: Wikipedia, the GNU/Linux community, and Indymedia."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_transparency

Wiki Transparency

"One American student sent major corporations, governments and even the Vatican on the defensive after coming up with Wikipedia Scanner, a software program that reveals who changed Wikipedia entries.

Wikipedia.com is an online encyclopedia edited by general users, who write articles on every imaginable subject. Since it is written by users, anyone can edit, delete and arrange the articles on Wikipedia.

What Virgil Griffith did was come up with a program that reveals who edits these articles, via a system where it scans the I.P address and cross-references it with the I.P. directory.

As soon as the software was launched on the internet, chaos erupted.

Among many revelations, Wikipedia Scanner reported that:

- Microsoft tried to cover up the XBOX 360 failure rate

- Apple edit Microsoft entries, adding more negative comments about its rival

- Bill Gates revenge? Microsoft edits Apple entries, adding more negative comments about its rival

- The Vatican edits Irish Catholic politician Gerry Adams page

- In the 9/11 Wikipedia article, the NRA added that "Iraq was involved in 9/11"

- Exxon Mobil edits spillages and eco-system destruction from oil spillages article

- FBI edits Guantanamo Bay, removing numerous pictures

- Oil company ChevronTexaco removes informative biodiesel article and deletes a paragraph regarding fines against the company

- Scientology removes criticism and negatives article from Scientology page

- Al Jazeera TV station adds that the foundation of Iraq was just as bad as the Holocaust

- Amnesty International removes negative comments

- Dell Computers deletes negative comments on customer services and removes a passage how the company outsources work to third world countries

- MySpace removes paragraph when their website was hacked

- EA Games deletes whole paragraphs of criticism about employment practices and business methods

- Dog breeding association deletes whole paragraphs about fatal attacks by dogs on humans

- US Republican Party changes the "Post-Saddam" section of the Baath Party article to a different account of the war, changing the language from "US-led occupation" to "US-led liberation"

- Fox News removes all controversial topics against the network from the Fox News page

- News of the World deletes a number of criticism against the paper

- Nestle removes negative comments on its business practices from its page

- UN address calls journalist Oriana Fallaci a racist "prostitute"

- Portuguese government removes entries about Prime Minister’s scandals

- DieBold, the company that controversially supplied computerised polling stations in the US elections, removes numerous paragraphs with negative comments

- Walmart removes criticism of outsourcing work. The retailer also changes negative paragraphs of underpaid workforce

- Sony removes harmful paragraphs against blu-ray systems

- Someone at Reuters calls Bush "a mass murderer"

- Coca Cola removes negative content about its effects

- British Conservative Party removes negative references of its MPs and deletes paragraph of the party’s old policies

- US University adds the "prestigious" adjective to its page

- Boeing edits from "Boeing is a leading American aircraft and aerospace manufacturer" to "Boeing is the leading American aircraft and aerospace manufacturer"

- MSN Search is "a major competitor to Google". That’s what MSN added to their page

- BBC changes Blair's drink from coffee to vodka and his workout from the gym to the bedroom. Someone from the BBC also changes Bush’s page, changing the name from "George Walker Bush" to "George Wanker Bush"

- Someone from The Guardian edits the Wikipedia page of rival newspaper The Times. Originally in the article it is said that The Times sells more than The Guardian. After the edit, The Guardian sells more."

http://www.maltastar.com/pages/msFullArt.asp?an=14323

Share with us what the purpose of this thread is. Is there something we couldn't find ourselves if we were interested? Is there some subtle message you are attempting to deliver that didn't get delivered?

Well, the transparency of the Wiki shows us corporate behavior clearly enough. Their message, true or not, is the priority.

Knowing that depends on transparency.

Traditional media sources do not have this feature.

If one takes the Wiki performances as normal behavior (PR) then one gets a nice look into what is highly likely to be standard behavior there as well.

Rough conclusion: Media bias is corporate first, then left, right, whatever from there.

Deane, this topic has been touched on the other side in discussions specifically regarding radio Wiki entries. I figured that it would bear a look in a broader way.

Some of the best contributors to this board also submit information to Wikipedia. Since Wiki is a world wide resource of information, transparency is important to the process. I am glad this kid whipped up a program to show us another corner of Oz.

Missing, great points. It is neither right nor left before it is corporate.

Absolutely.

This is exactly why I consume very little broadcast news these days.

>>>"Deane, this topic has been touched on the other side in discussions specifically regarding radio Wiki entries. I figured that it would bear a look in a broader way."

The point I was making is that you should state your reason for posting the link and what your opinions and thoughts are.

I try to use Wikipedia as little as possible - this is one of the reasons why.
I also came across another interesting website along the same lines the other day...
uncyclopedia.org