Crowdsourced Content Quotes

I first met Jimbo Wales, the face of Wikipedia, when he came to speak at Stanford.

Open-source encyclopedias such as Wikipedia and search engines such as Google and Bing, which people can tap into anytime and anywhere via computers and smart phones, put a world of knowledge at our fingertips at a lower cost than ever before.

I envision a future where there'll be 300 million reporters, where anyone from anywhere can report for any reason. It's freedom of participation absolutely realized.

Journalists don't have audiences - they have publics who can respond instantly and globally, positively or negatively, with a great deal more power than the traditional letters to the editor could wield.

In a world where we can all be our own filmmakers, the old elites are disappearing and there is no desire to look at somebody else's dream anymore because you can go off and make your own.

I've consciously avoided actually reading anything about Wikipedia.

YouTube is found footage. It's here to stay, and people will always come up with new concepts that will make sense for found footage.

I think that's one of the most unique and potentially powerful things about reddit - people come for the news, and stay for the community.

Reddit is where anyone can come and tell their real story.

With Digg, users submit stories for review, but rather than allow an editor to decide which stories go on the homepage, the users do.

Wikipedia is a strange thing. Whoever gets there first, you know, they decide. Like the picture: You can't choose it! You can't be like, 'You know, I hate that picture of me doing stand-up from 2005 - that doesn't exemplify who I am.' You take it down, and someone puts it back up.

I'm happy we're about to start inviting people into the thing we've been working on!! It's called Pinwheel, and it's a way to find and leave notes all around the world.

Given enough time humans will screw up Wikipedia just as they have screwed up everything else, but so far it's not too bad.

The upside of web-based journalism is that everybody gets a chance. The downside is that everybody gets a chance.

Since news breaks on digg very quickly, we face the same issues as newspapers which print a retraction for a story that was misreported. The difference with digg is that equal play can be given to both sides of a story, whereas with a newspaper, a retraction or correction is usually buried.

The wonderful thing about 'Star Trek' is that they're very open to suggestions for scripts and story ideas from the viewers. That's really unique.

With Twitter, it's a little harder to tell jokes that somebody hasn't heard already. You have all these people out there sharing their opinions and telling jokes in real time, and by the time you get on, somebody's already done some version of what you're trying to do.

When we made 'Life in a Day,' we asked people around the globe to record their lives on a single ordinary day. When we were cutting that film, we talked about what it might be like if we chose a day that already had significance to people. The result is 'Christmas in a Day.'

The Internet has allowed a lot of access - people feel entitled to change the ending of games, for example. So there are a lot more voices coming at you all the time, which I think has its effect on creative decision making and possibly makes people more afraid to take risks.

We have been pushing forward on a new way of storytelling we call 'collaborative journalism' on behalf of a number of our clients.

Reddit strives to be a community-oriented link-sharing and news site, which means that all our content is submitted and voted on by members of our community. We don't interfere with that process at all, either in an editorial or curation capacity.

Wikipedia, a nonprofit, is an enormously popular website but has managed to operate without advertising. And, you know, maybe it's a little simpler than Google and YouTube, but it does show there's another way.