Wikipedia Face Off....The Daytime Talk Show

The purpose of the Wikipedia page is….what?

…To condense all known information of a subject into one place?

…To give a semi-reliable summary on a topic?

…To encourage an audience to gain a new understanding of a particular subject?

All of these may seem similar at the surface level. Yet, I would argue that the Wikipedia page as a form has, very much so, the capability of the last option - to shape a reader’s understanding of a chosen issue. To explore this idea further, I chose to analyze and compare two Wikipedia pages – those of The View and The Ellen Degeneres Show.  In taking a closer look at these pages, I began to form the opinion that these pages, beyond attempting to relay condensed information, are actually designed to communicate structural concepts unique to the shows themselves. This relates directly to Jim Ridolfo and Martine Courant Rife’s idea of Rhetorical Velocity, which is the author’s active consideration of how this text may be repurposed by its viewers.

“The View” Wikipedia page takes from a larger pool of sources than the “Ellen” page does. It does seem that if the Ellen page went into as much depth as “The View” page then there would be more sources. “The View” page is also more intricate in its detailing of its Seasons and episode content while the “Ellen Degeneres Show” page is much more simplistic/all-encompassing in its information. Because the face of The View has changed so much compared to Ellen, it is not surprising that their Wikipedia page would want to keep more of a historic log of its progression and changes. It serves as more of an archive than Ellen’s page does.  

With these surface level comparisons stated, there is more to be seen in these two pages than just content. I find it very interesting what is included and also what is excluded form these pages.

Ellen’s page goes into more depth about the technical side of making the show than “The View” does. On the opposite end, the focus of “The View” page lies in front of the camera. Almost every link listed is the name of a famous individual somehow associated with the show. Yet, the “Ellen” page has almost no links, and of those present, possibly 2% are of famous individuals.  It is interesting to me that “The View” much more readily documents its interactions with famous individuals than it does elements that the audience has chosen to attach themselves to such as Sophia Grace and Rosie of “The Ellen Degeneres Show.” It really shows me the differing core values of these two shows.

M. Jimmie Killingsworth discusses in his Appeals to Modern Rhetoric (Time) the concept of the “4 D’s” that news stories shape themselves around: drama, distaster, debate, dichotomy (38). This relates more closely to the Wikipedia page for “The View” and the specific filter content passes through in order to qualify as adequate to air. This distinction also communicates the differing desired audience of these shows. “The View” page emanates a much more “social” interaction between the show and its audience than “Ellen.” Meaning - familiarity with topics discussed on The View would be something one could reference in a proper social situation and feel welcome. Where as, a more casual, family, situation would be deemed more appropriate for the material on the Ellen show, such as her famous dancing at the beginning of every show, as its Wikipedia page highlights.

I find it important to note the handling of gay rights by these twos shows. It does differ greatly in that “The View” is, as its Wikipedia site states, split down the middle “with two on either side of the issue and Walters maintaining journalistic neutrality,” while the “Ellen” page, aside from Degeneres’ being openly homosexual, is silent on the issue. In context with the overabundance of famous references and such on its Wikipedia page, it seems that The View seems to include it only for the purpose of ratings in that it is a “hot issue.” I find this dynamic of how the show uses such a topic to stir conversation and disagreement for public discussion (with a particular audience) to be intriguing, and slightly troubling.

Overall, the Wikipedia page is a form that, as I have discovered through this comparison, contains the ability to shape its audience’s understanding of a topic. Never before would I have noted the tone of “The View” Wikipedia page had I not put it into direct conversation with “The Ellen Degeneres Show” page. The differences between these two pages solidify the purpose of the Wikipedia page as a form that can go beyond “synopsis” or “summary.” It can actually venture into the territory of thematic structure and concepts surrounding/impacting a given topic. 

References:

Ridolfo, Jim, and Martine Courant Rife. RHETORICAL VELOCITY AND COPYRIGHT: A CASE STUDY ON STRATEGIES OF RHETORICAL DELIVERY. 223-243. Print.

Killingsworth, M. Jimmie. Appeals In Modern Rhetoric. 38-51. Print.