Subscribe: Comments on: ‘Radical’ transparency
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade A rated
Language: English
blog archive  blog  chris anderson  chris  daily blog  jarvis  jeff jarvis  jeff  magazine  media  point  radical transparency  transparency 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Comments on: ‘Radical’ transparency

Comments on: ‘Radical’ transparency

The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.

Last Build Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2017 09:52:00 +0000


By: Jenay

Fri, 02 Sep 2011 15:13:03 +0000

It's really great that people are sharing this infoamrtion.

By: Five Lessons from Supernova Forum 2010 - Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania #sn10 | Sparksheet

Tue, 03 Aug 2010 16:22:10 +0000

[...] with prostate cancer (and the emasculating after-effects), Jarvis made an ethical case for living a radically transparent life. Boyd cautioned that what people are willing to share depends on perceived expectations of [...]

By: digitallantern

Fri, 22 Dec 2006 02:18:58 +0000

#6 Chris does go to far. It is an interesting point toallow articles to be continually revised (in 1984, that was Winston's job - to constantly revise past histories). There is something to be said for a pure declarative statement at the time it was said. The artist finds a point when "it is finished" and complete. See the "Clock of the Long Now" for an opposing mentality to the impermanent Web.

By: Chris Anderson Calls for “Radical Transparency” in Media » The Bivings Report

Thu, 21 Dec 2006 15:30:06 +0000

[...] Update 2: Jeff Jarvis weighs in. [...]

By: The Daily Novel » Blog Archive » Radical transparency; Part two

Sun, 17 Dec 2006 21:55:37 +0000

[...] But Adrian Monck has just touched on another thing that should be in the About Me bit of blogging journalists. Books that have influenced me. Adrian’s contribution is about someone that the rest of you in this debate; Chris Anderson, Howard Owens, and Jeff Jarvis,  may not have heard. [...]

By: The Daily Novel » Blog Archive » Thoughts on radical transparency

Sun, 17 Dec 2006 17:58:37 +0000

[...] Wikifiy everything. Let the readers edit what we write. Don’t agree. I am with Jeff Jarvis on this one. We use our journalistic skills to maintain standards so far as we can. We should not cede authorship to unknowns who may not have any evidence to back the assertions they are making. [...]

By: Chris Brogan...

Sun, 17 Dec 2006 06:20:40 +0000

Hi Jeff- About your point regarding separating the magazine from the crowd, are you saying that the readers have an equal voice to the authors? Or is it that you're saying let the readers write some "open face" stories? Because wouldn't that be like opening up BuzzMachine for any old toot to write a post? I'm here for YOU and I appreciate your commenters. But in that order. I might've mis-interpreted. Your fan, Chris. : )

By: media blog » Blog Archive »

Sat, 16 Dec 2006 13:29:39 +0000

[...] In a post about radical transparency (a topic I previously touched on), Jeff Jarvis writes: Believe it or not, I almost think that last one may go too far. There is still a role for authorial responsibility. That doesn’t mean control — yes, by all means, show us the corrections and suggestions, but then do the work to verify and edit. [...]

By: Andrew Venegas

Sat, 16 Dec 2006 09:35:10 +0000

I regularly read your blog, and had to comment and giant, "YES," on this post. To myself: You mean there's someone else out there that's read Cluetrain?! Sometimes I think I've taken crazy pills. Go Jeff.

By: adslfan

Sat, 16 Dec 2006 00:52:10 +0000

bring back the neon colors in the mag from the 90's.

By: Beta Alfa 2.0 » Skapa engagemang med transparenta medier

Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:20:05 +0000

[...] BuzzMachine: ‘Radical’ transparency [...]

By: Kempton

Fri, 15 Dec 2006 18:59:31 +0000

Hi Jeff, Interesting point of viewing in seeing the magazine as the crowd (I prefer the term "community" as my friend Austin Hill has got me hooked on using now). As you already implied (I think), the magazine is also a resource and an anchor. It is a resource because it has the reporters and accesses to verify and respond to things added by the community. It is an anchor since all the new discussions/topics can be anchored around the magazine's original article and grow from it.