Mediaboss Marketing

A tragicomic air clings to bands who light up the sky like a firework and fade away. The Norwegian subjects of a-ha: The Movie are best known for their 1985 hit Take on Me, but, despite successful shows, seem mired in creative purgatory. Thomas Robsahm and Aslaug Holms documentary trawls the bands career with musings from its three members Paul Waaktaar-Savoy, Magne Furuholmen and the Ken Dollesque lead singer Morten Harket and key associates.

Bouncing around synth-pop-happy London in the early 1980s, the driven trio of accomplished musicians landed a contract with Warner Brothers. Take on Me, with its infectious arpeggios and liberating high notes, made them stars, boosted by a delightful part-animated music video from Steven Barron (who also made videos for Billie Jean and Money for Nothing).

Then what? The documentary reviews the bands chronology like a slavish yet intermittently lucid Wikipedia entry. We dont learn how a-ha continued to get the privilege of releasing albums (including denim and shiny-shirt phases at either end of the 1990s) or what kept thousands of fans coming back for more. But we do witness a hundred muted shades of glum and listless: Furuholmen still seems sad about abandoning guitar for keyboards, decades ago, while Harket talks about needing his space. Waaktaar-Savoys attitude can be summed up by a sticker behind him in one shot: No Stupid People.

Theres a slight wonky interest in seeing the grind of recording sessions and fan service. But the film feels promotional enough that it wont lean into the potential humor of their situation.

a-ha: The MovieNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 49 minutes. In theaters.

Read more:
a-ha: The Movie Review: The Creative Purgatory of the Take on Me Trio - The New York Times

Russia's communications regulator is threatening to fine Google and Wikipedia for not removing what it describes as misinformation about the war in Ukraine. Chris Delmas/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

Russia's communications regulator is threatening to fine Google and Wikipedia for not removing what it describes as misinformation about the war in Ukraine.

The Russian government is threatening to fine Wikipedia if it doesn't remove content that contradicts its narrative about the war in Ukraine.

Communications regulator Roskomnadzor announced on Thursday that it had asked the online encyclopedia to remove a page containing "unreliable socially significant materials, as well as other prohibited information" about its operations in Ukraine, according to an English translation. It accused the site of intentionally misinforming Russian users.

It said it could fine Wikipedia up to 4 million rubles, or nearly $47,000, for failing to remove those materials, which are illegal under Russian law.

Russia enacted legislation last month that criminalizes war reporting that doesn't echo the Kremlin's version of events including by calling it a war. The law has forced most of Russia's remaining independent news outlets to close and many journalists to leave the country for fear of facing up to 15 years in prison.

The Wikipedia page in question describes the history and context of the war, as well as specific military operations, casualties and humanitarian impact, human rights violations, legal proceedings, international reaction, economic consequences and media depictions.

It is not clear what specific details the regulator is looking to have removed, but Newsweek reports that it said on Monday that the Russian-language version of the page contained "inaccurate information about the special military operation to protect the Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics for the de-militarization and de-Nazification of Ukraine," including the use of the words war, aggression and invasion.

Roskomnadzor's announcement follows two separate warnings to the Wikimedia Foundation, which owns and operates the encyclopedia.

A spokesperson for the foundation told NPR over email that it had received demands on March 1 and again on March 29 to remove information from the Russian-language version of the page about the invasion, before learning of the possible fine.

"The Wikimedia Foundation supports everyone's fundamental right to access free, open, and verifiable information; this escalation does not change our commitment," the spokesperson said.

The information on Wikipedia is sourced and shared by volunteers, with the foundation saying last month that Ukrainian volunteers were continuing to make additions and edits to the encyclopedia even as the war on their country unfolded.

The spokesperson reiterated on Friday that the information within the article continues to be verified, fact-checked and "improved by an ever growing number of Wikipedia volunteer editors," who determine the site's content and editorial standards.

"The Wikimedia Foundation protects and will continue to protect their ability to engage in research and contribute to Wikipedia," the spokesperson added.

In a statement released after the first takedown request last month, the Wikimedia Foundation said the demand "threatened censorship," and that denying people access to reliable information at a time of crisis could have "life-altering consequences." As of March 3, they said the English-language version of the page had been viewed more than 11 million times, and articles about the war had been created in more than 99 languages.

"Wikipedia is an important source of reliable, factual information in this crisis," the foundation wrote. "In recognition of this important role, we will not back down in the face of efforts to censor and intimidate members of our movement. We stand by our mission to deliver free knowledge to the world."

Wikipedia isn't the only information platform facing such a request from Roskomnadzor. Just days ago, the agency warned it would fine Google up to 8 million rubles (more than $93,000) for not following its orders to remove YouTube videos to which it objected.

This story originally appeared on the Morning Edition live blog.

See the original post here:
Russia threatens to fine Wikipedia if it doesn't remove some details about the war - NPR

Did you know that theres a Swiss political party dedicated to opposing the use of PowerPoint? That some people believe Avril Lavigne died in 2003 and was replaced by a look-alike? Or that theres a stone in a museum in Taiwan that uncannily resembles a slab of meat?

Probably not unless, that is, youre one of the hundreds of thousands of people who follow @depthsofwikipedia. The Instagram account shares bizarre and surprising snippets from the vast, crowdsourced online encyclopedia, including amusing images (a chicken literally crossing a road) and minor moments in history (Mitt Romney driving several hours with his dog atop his car). Some posts are wholesome such as Hatsuyume, the Japanese word for ones first dream of the year while others are not safe for work (say, panda pornography).

Annie Rauwerda, 22, started the account in the early days of the pandemic, when others were baking sourdough bread and learning how to knit. Everyone was starting projects, and this was my project, she said.

At the time, she was a sophomore at the University of Michigan. Students are often discouraged from using Wikipedia as a source in academic work, because most of its pages can be edited by anyone and may contain inaccurate information. But for Ms. Rauwerda, the site was always more about entertainment: spending hours clicking on one link after another, getting lost in rabbit holes.

Wikipedia is the best thing on the internet, Ms. Rauwerda said in a phone interview. Its what the internet was supposed to be. It has this hacker ethos of working together and making something.

At first, only her friends were following the account. But it received a wave of attention when Ms. Rauwerda posted about the influencer Caroline Calloway, who was upset that the post featured an old version of her Wikipedia page that said her occupation was nothing. Ms. Rauwerda apologized, and Ms. Calloway later boosted the account on her Instagram.

Ms. Rauwerda has since expanded @depthsofwikipedia to Twitter and TikTok. She sells merchandise (such as a coffee mug emblazoned with an image from the Wikipedia entry for bisexual lighting) and has hosted a live show in Manhattan, featuring trivia and stand-up.

Her followers often pitch her Wikipedia pages to feature, but these days its hard to find an entry that will impress Ms. Rauwerda. If its a fun fact thats been on the Reddit home page, Im definitely not going to repost it, she said. For example, there are only 25 blimps in the world. Ive known about that for a long time, and it went around Twitter a couple days ago. I was shocked. I was like, Everyone knows this.

She is choosy in large part because many of her followers rely on @depthsofwikipedia for unearthing the hidden gems of the internet.

I just love to learn stuff, especially these strange photos and things I could never find on my own, said Gabe Hockett, 15, a high school student in Minneapolis. He said his favorite posts from the account include The Most Unwanted Song and the Dave Matthews Band Chicago River incident.

Jen Fox, 22, said that trading posts from the account with her boyfriend is a special, nerdy love language. Its also been a litmus test for friendships. When Ms. Fox, a copywriter, moved to San Francisco in February, she would mention the account to new people she met. If they were familiar with it, she said, we would start DM-ing each other and sharing our favorite posts, which felt like we were really solidifying a concrete friendship. Ms. Fox even attended a @depthsofwikipedia meet-up at a local brewery. Theres such a community behind it, she said.

Its not new for lovers of Wikipedia to rally around their passion for the platform. A Facebook group called Cool Freaks Wikipedia Club, founded eight years ago, has nearly 50,000 members who actively trade links.

Ms. Rauwerdas account makes the internet feel smaller, said Heather Woods, an assistant professor of rhetoric and technology at Kansas State University. It shortcuts the rabbit-hole phenomenon by offering attractive or sometimes hilariously unattractive entry points to internet culture.

Zachary McCune, the brand director for the Wikimedia Foundation, which operates Wikipedia, said that @depthsofwikipedia is an extension of the sites participatory ethos. Its a place where Wikipedia comes to life, like an after-hours tour of the best of Wikipedia, Mr. McCune said.

And because Wikipedia has more than 55 million articles, having a guide like Ms. Rauwerda is helpful. She hopes that visitors to her page walk away with new shared knowledge. I want you to see something that makes you pause and go, Hmm, thats interesting, Ms. Rauwerda said. Something that makes you rethink the world a little bit.

See original here:
Mining the Depths of Wikipedia on Instagram - The New York Times

Heres a fun fact: the guy on the front of a Pringles can has a name Julius Pringles.

Heres an even funner fact: Pringles only started using that name in 2013, after Kelloggs acquired the company and trademarked it before using it in a half-hearted social media push involving Jimmy Fallon and then sort of forgetting about it for a bit.

Heres the funnest fact of all: the first fun fact began as a lie, until one day it became the truth.

Sign up for our weekly technology newsletter, TechScape.

Julius Pringles began his existence not in a marketing brainstorming session at Kelloggs HQ in 2013, but in a college dorm room in 2006, when two freshmen quietly inserted the name into the Pringles Wikipedia page as an element of lighthearted vandalism:

The Pringles logo is a stylized cartoon caricature of the head of a male figure (commonly known as Julius Pringles) designed by Louis R Dixon.

Unlike most Wikipedia vandalism, it had a bit more effort behind it than simply whacking the edit button and dropping in a lie. One of the pair, Justin Shillock, was already a Wikipedia moderator with a fairly solid reputation, and the two immediately made a Facebook group Who knew he was named Julius Pringles? to help embed the claim further. After it was removed once, it was re-added, in a different format further up the page.

After a while, the name ended up just sticking around on the Wikipedia page, never quite getting enough attention to garner a citation needed tag, and eventually becoming such a longstanding claim on the page, only a total redraft by a dedicated editor would have had a chance of dislodging it.

Fake news travels fast

Such falsehoods havent been uncommon, particularly in the early days of Wikipedia. As much as the site has now outgrown its reputation among educators and experts as an untrustworthy den of calumny, its worth acknowledging that its reputation didnt come from nowhere.

And while Wikipedias systems, both formal and informal, do generally work to expel low-effort vandalism, falsehoods can stick around if they start to interact with the world outside the site. Almost a decade ago, the webcomic XKCD coined the phrase citogenesis to describe the process whereby a fake fact on Wikipedia is copied by a rushed journalist into an article, which is itself used as a source to prove the truth of the fact.

For instance: a friend, whose anonymity Ill preserve, once decided to add a fictional biographical detail to the page for Belarusian writer Svetlana Alexivitch that she briefly worked on Belarus first carp-fishing magazine. The claim was live for barely 15 minutes before an eagle-eyed editor pulled it, but that was still long enough for the claim to make it into a Deutsche Welle profile of the author.

But this is the first example Ive heard of something that goes beyond mere citogenesis. Here, a piece of Wikipedia vandalism managed to weave a true fact into reality, where it lay dormant until a viral tweet earlier this week.

It shows, I think, the inadequacy of so much conventional discussion around misinformation on the internet. Sometimes there really is such a thing as fake news: the claim that the pope endorsed Donald Trump for president really is, simply, false. But the internet isnt distinct from the wider world, and sometimes it can do more than simply reflect reality. It can alter it, too.

Thats not to say that enough people believing in the Ghost of Kyiv will suddenly summon a fighter ace into the sky above Ukraine. But if enough people believe plucky tractor drivers are taking on Russian tanks and winning well, that might be the sort of fact that begins as propaganda and blossoms into something else.

If you want to read the complete version of the newsletter please subscribe to receive TechScape in your inbox every Wednesday.

Go here to see the original:
TechScape: When Wikipedia fiction becomes real life fact - The Guardian

But the public perception of Wikipedia has changed, and must continue to do so, argues Adam Harangozo, the first ever Wikimedian in Residence at the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) based in London.

Mr Harangozo, who formerly worked in Edinburgh, is one of a growing number of Wikimedians in residence at libraries, universities and other cultural institutions across Scotland and the UK.

Sign up to our public interest bulletins - get the latest news on the Coronavirus

Sign up to our public interest bulletins - get the latest news on the Coronavirus

He is the first to work with the NIHR, as part of a pilot which began last year.

His role forms part of the evidence and dissemination team, and involves planning, coordination and teaching.

The goal is for accurate information about medical research to be more accessible to the public.

He believes there is a gap in health literacy, both in the language used by scientists and their distance in society from most everyday people.

It is the responsibility of science to be open, inclusive and transparent, he said.

"If there is a problem that people don't seem to trust or understand something, it is not people's job to go after science, it is sciences job to do things differently or do things better.

Wikipedia is a great platform for that, because there scientists and the lay public work on the same texts, the same knowledge, under the same rules.

There are still a lot of preconceptions and scepticism about Wikipedia, Mr Harangozo said, but it is more reliable than people think, with several studies finding its content high quality when compare to scientific journals.

Wikipedia doesn't pretend to be a reliable source in the sense of please use me in your PhD as a source. It is an encyclopaedia. It is a starting point, to get information and then it leads to other reliable sources, he said.

Many people think that just because anyone can edit it youre free to do whatever you want, but actually there are very rigorous policies and guidelines on Wikipedia which try to ensure that you're writing from a neutral point of view, you're using reliable sources, and that all the statements that you put there are verifiable through those sources.

It is extremely important that more institutions begin to work with Wikipedia, which is used by billions of people to find medical information, he added.

The pandemic has been a challenge and an opportunity for medical information on Wikipedia, and Mr Harangozo believes it has risen to it well.

Something that can be edited by anyone and is thought to be not necessarily reliable managed to keep up in this storm of misinformation, and really defend itself from fake news and misinformation, he said, adding that Wikipedia remains a reliable source in this very important and quickly changing atmosphere.

Candace Imison, Associate Director of Evidence and Dissemination at the NIHR, also said the spread of misinformation about Covid and vaccines during the pandemic has highlighted the importance of trustworthy sources of information.

Our collaboration with Wikimedia UK, through the new Wikimedian in residence role, provides the NIHR with a great opportunity to promote the evidence from health and social care research to a mass audience, she said.

A message from the Editor:

Thank you for reading this article. We're more reliant on your support than ever as the shift in consumer habits brought about by coronavirus impacts our advertisers.

Read the original:
How scientists are working with Wikipedia on access to reliable information - The Scotsman