Wikipedia lacks ethos among other things<< It's that time of year | Main | OK, We've got NBC on board, who's next on the iPod? >> Michael Gartenberg | December 05, 2005, 12:11 PM I'ts often touted as a poster child for Web 2.0 but lately it seems Wikipedia has come under some pretty serious fire. First, there was the oped in USA today from John Seigenthaler Sr. He was the assistant to Robert Kennedy and in a profile in Wikipedia he was listed as "thought to have been directly involved in the Kennedy assassinations of both John, and his brother, Bobby. Nothing was ever proven." . Then it seems Adam Curry was accused of changing the history of podcasting and re-writing it exclude others and inflate his own role. While some might called the good old Britannica, Web 1.0 (as if that's an insult of sorts). At the end of the day, it provided something the Wikipedia sorely lacks, namely ethos. The reall story of the Wikipedia is why would anyone presume anything written in there is accurate? Where's the accountablity? Well, there is none. Another reason why good content written by professionals with editorial oversight isn't going away anytime soon. |
 Subscribe for free JupiterResearch email updates:
|