« Downey on Apollo | Main | Wikipedia taboo? »
January 23, 2007
Soapbox: Handling Wikipedia?
Soapbox: Handling Wikipedia? Seeking your thoughts here... yesterday there was a controversy about "MS pays non-staffers to correct Wikipedia"... hit Slashdot... today there's a Microsoft response. This topic came up in the Flash community a few times last year, but without real resolution. Do you have any new advice or opinions for Adobe staffers on this now? Me, I give in and make Wikipedia edits about twice a year, but the core problem of wikis and opinion-mongering remains, and I'm not yet satisfied with any course of action on countering wiki manipulation. I'm not interested in the Microsoft involvement, but do you have current thoughts on how Adobe should handle such issues? Thanks!
Posted by JohnDowdell at January 23, 2007 11:43 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://weblogs.macromedia.com/mtadmin/mt-tb.cgi/8296
Comments
If you feel obligated, can't you just notate your changes with your affilliation? In my opinion it doesn't matter either way--having opinion, biased opinion, uninformed opinion, etc. is just the nature of wikis.
I do believe that "kids these days" have to be careful what they believe. Perhaps their comfort with technology makes them scrutinize stuff even more--but I think all these great powers that regular folks have to publish (blogs, wikis, etc.) introduce flaws. While conventional media and editorializing has its own problems, it does generally check out the facts at least a little. There was an interesting commentary from Daniel Schorr (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6944951) saying that announcing campaigns on the web (without traditional media) lets them sidestep hard questions.
Posted by: Phillip Kerman at January 23, 2007 01:00 PM
Disclosure is harder in an ever-editable wiki than in communication channels which leave a permanent record, like weblogs or mailing lists... I'm not sure how to do such a thing.
"One document which anyone can edit, forever"... seems like it would work for some types of knowledge, not work for others ("wikis converge, blogs diverge").
(Re: politicians going Web20, yeah, we're in for it now, I'm considering just hibernating 'til Nov08.... ;-)
Posted by: John Dowdell at January 23, 2007 07:51 PM
I can see this being much the same as the laptop give-aways discussion.
Some are all for it, Some aren't.
From Adobe's perspective, I don't see how it would hurt? provided Adobe approach it from facts, keep it to the facts and be as transparent as possible. Stick to those boundaries and you should by rights stay out of the headlines (no gurantee though).
You guys know more about your products then anyone else, so its fair play?
Just be careful :)
SB@Microsoft.
Posted by: Scott Barnes at January 24, 2007 02:20 AM
Kind of funny that I *CAN* post any untrue info
about any item on Wikipedia.... but a company
can't have someone post the *CORRECT* info instead.
Great news.
Posted by: Everyone at January 24, 2007 04:38 PM
Anyone, actually, CAN post new information, or disinformation on Wikipedia, even in the name of their employer. The problem is that everyone does it wrong. To prove how borked the system is, I'm going to write a Wikipedia Game Guide to show how to do it right.
Posted by: Joe Szilagyi at April 25, 2007 12:01 PM