Undercurrent

The Crimes of War Project has published a new version of the already essential and classic anthology simply titled “Crimes of War: What the Public Should Know”. From the press release:

The book is an A-Z guide to the laws of war and their application in today’ls world, written by some of the world’ls leading journalists and scholars, in clear and compelling language. The revised edition includes detailed coverage of all recent developments and controversies, including the “war on terror,” Iraq, Darfur and the rise of international courts and tribunals.

The new edition includes articles on Afghanistan, Occupation, Detention and Interrogation, Guantanamo. Best of all, the book’s articles are also online, so the knowledge has been made easily available. You have to buy the book to see the photographs, and it’s worth it as many of the world’s best photojournalists have contributed.

“Wikipedia isn’t generally useless, but its usefulness is rather limited, especially when one needs information that can be trusted,” Norwegian Associate Professor of philosophy Lars Fr. H. Svendsen claimed this week.

I’m afraid this is a representative attitude among Norwegian scientists and scholars to Wikipedia, if they have an attitude at all. Wikipedia is kept at arm’s length. A study would probably find that few of them know how Wikipedia is edited and how the process of quality control works.

More constructive approaches are possible. German public service broadcaster ZDF reports from a seminar called “Wikipedia-Academy” in Mainz on how some humanities scholars in that country engage with Wikipedia (the German language version is the second largest overall). Translator of literature Josef Winiger (64) received a prize from the German Wikipedia community for his work on the article about the philosopher Ludwig Feuerbach. Now there’s a challenge for Svendsen and his colleagues.

In another ZDF article, Professor Peter Wippermann says that the scholars in reality need Wikipedia more than the encyclopedia needs them. The humanities are facing a growing legitimation pressure — the ivory towers that scholars can retreat to are getting ever more scarce. Because of that, scholars in the humanities need to market their knowledge through Wikipedia, he says: At Wikipedia they can legitimate themselves again and give something back to society. (Thanks to Daniel for the tip).

UPDATE: Svendsen’s article is being discussed at the Tinget (Village Pump) page of no-Wikipedia.

“It is crystal clear to me now that at least in industries where lots of people are online, blogging is the single best way to communicate and interact, Marc Andreessen concludes after five weeks’ experience with blogging.

Strong and encouraging stuff from the Netscape founder! Nowadays, you are more likely to hear people groaning about blogging or just dismissing the format as “very 2003″ or something equally original. Thankfully, the Wall Street Journal reinforces the Andreessen effect with a 10 years blogiversary celebration. (10 years? Yes, in a few months, anyway. As Tunku Varadarajan notes, the consensus is – as far as that is possible – that the blog term was coined by Jorn Barger in December 1997. But of course the blog format was in the incubator from day 1 of the www age. Andreessen himself mentions that he updated a page in 1993 that looks suspiciously like a classic link blog!)

The WSJ has polled an impressive gang of ten about their favourite blogs and relation to blogging, thereby finagling a selection of views and topics that together form a varied panorama. Take Elizabeth Spiers’ precise definition of criteria for a successful blog:

Of the various blogs I’ve written or produced, the ones that worked best — the ones that had the biggest and most loyal readerships — always had a few consistent qualities. They were topically focused, often in niche areas. They published regularly and frequently, typically during office hours and several times a day. They published content that was original or difficult to find, from breaking news to proprietary photographs to obscure links that readers are unlikely to find on their own. They were usually well-written, which has its own intrinsic appeal for anyone who prefers to enjoy what they’re reading. And lastly, they engaged their readership by soliciting feedback and responding to it, in the form of asking for tips, allowing comments or otherwise demonstrating some level of interest in their audience’s preferences.

But all ten of them are worth reading, of course also my old favourite Tom Wolfe’s (unusually taciturn) dismissal of all things “user-generated”.

Hans Rosling is already well known by many for his incredible presentations using the Gapminder tool (which was acquired by Google). Now here is his first GapCast which deals with “Health, money and sex in Sweden” in a historical perspective. Rosling has the perfect combination of personality, knowledge and tools to become a Global Celebrity Educator, if such a thing can be imagined. A web era David Attenborough? (via mymarkup):