There has a been great deal of discussion and controversy lately regarding the accuracy of Wikipedia entries and the existence of so-called Wikipedia “Zealots” controlling and manipulating the information with their inherent biases. Lawrence Solomon (an editor for the Financial Post) wrote an article last Saturday (April 12th) entitled: Wikipedia’s Zealots – The thought police at the supposedly independent site are fervently enforcing the climate orthodoxy. -where he provided a play-by-play of how his entry had been repeatedly edited by a single editor holding a different opinion on climate change. In response the blogosphere is questioning the accuracy and reliability of Wikipedia as well as it’s “loss of innocence” so to say.
So what are my thoughts on all of this?
It’s unfortunate, but I think this will always occur to some extent. This is why communism doesn’t work in practice (someone needs to control the system for it to work) and why democracy has a tremendous rich/poor gap (elite in control). The good news is that thanks to social media, we now have the means to discuss these issues publicly and start up conversations with a worldwide audience. Just look at the amount of discussion on the topic of “Wikipedia Zealots†since that Financial Post article was published (Google the term or just do a Technorati Search).
Being “aware†and “informed†is crucial. Each individual still has the responsibility not to take any piece of information at face-value and determine potential biases. Think of it this way, if you were reading a particular entry in Encyclopedia Britannica you would probably assume it to be true even though the individual biases of the particular academic(s) that wrote the article would be inherent in the text (even if minimal). It would not be questioned. However, with Wikipedia, the entries are constantly being questioned and as a result stirring discussion that continually makes them better. I can guarantee you that this climate change entry (mentioned in the Financial Post article) will be re-written over time to accommodate multiple views thanks in large part to the controversy surrounding it. There will probably even be a Wikipedia entry written on the “Wikipedia controversy surrounding the Lawrence Solomon article”. The wisdom of the crowd, in my opinion will therefore prevail in the end. Nobody ever said it was a straight road with no hurdles…
What are your thoughts?
Mike, I have to thank you for the time and energy you give to Social Media innovation, understanding it and parlaying it back to the rest of us who are all trying to harness its power. I am truly converted through your ability to turn the unknown into something truly usable and easy to implement. Thanks for moving me to action and continuing to feed my addiction!
You are very welcome Claire! I try to learn something new in the field myself each and every day.
Mike, you hit the nail on the head when you mentioned that it is up to each individual to NOT take a piece of info at face value and to determine a potential biases. That is truly a key in our transparent society.
This way, you will get the most from the action. Video games are a wonderful
way for children to have a great time, but sometimes games may come with hidden dangers.
It may be worth it to sell the old ones and wait.