Over the last month, Colbert has given us another gem: wikiality. “What we’re doing is bringing democracy to knowledge,” Colbert said on his July 31 episode, as he introduced the word. He then invited his viewers to log on to Wikipedia – the open-source encyclopedia that allows any user to edit most any document – and write that the population of elephants had actually tripled in the last six months.
The population of elephants has in fact declined, but Colbert – the persona, it should be remembered – argued that environmentalists could be corrected on anything if enough people said it was so. Colbert’s fans – heroes, he calls them – did so, with enough volume to crash the site temporarily, and (more enduringly prompting Wikipedia to lock down almost two dozen articles containing data about elephants.
Colbert made his point, but that was just the start. A month of so after it was coined, “wikiality” at this writing returns more than 290,000 hits on Google, and has spawned a funny site by that name. (With, yes, a full – and fictitious – entry on elephants.) The so-called Web 2.0 revolution has been made fun of before, but never so sharply or so well.
One further thought: won’t it be nice when we soon have a word for the sort of dope who believes what is read on a blog over authoritative sources? I suspect that will be one characteristic of the impending but not yet here new broader era of post-post-9/11 thinking. We are still, as you know, locked into the many forms of gullibility in the pre-post-post-9/11 world that that terrible tragedy unleashed as one of its many unanticipatible, incoherent and tangential off-spring. I am thinking of a word. It might be “clog” but I sorta used that up with the concept of “clogging” though they are not unrelated.