Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

_ News Worth Discussing _ Making The Case For PR Pros Editing Wikipedia - Techdirt

Posted by: Newsfeed


<img alt="" height="1" width="1" />http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&fd=R&usg=AFQjCNFg5LSyQ0nVNWOTViCGUs5DVtPH3Q&url=http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120124/12113517528/making-case-pr-pros-editing-wikipedia.shtml
Techdirt
Obscured amidst the hysteria over anti-piracy bills SOPA and PIPA has been a valuable discussion bubbling up within public relations about PR people editing clients' Wikipedia entries. It's a topic that has been debated for years.

http://news.google.com/news/more?ncl=dVfNLY1oX4CmkLM&ned=us

Posted by: SB_Johnny

QUOTE
Our position on this matter is simple: it's wrong for the PR profession to think it can run roughshod over the established Wikipedia community. PR professionals must engage with it in a reasonable manner that respects the community’s rules and protocols, while also ensuring they are acting in their clients' best interests. But the engagement should be a two-way street in which Wikipedia is willing to see and accommodate both sides of the issue. At the moment, we do not believe that to be the case.


I can't help but think this poor guy would really like to say something a bit more blunt. laugh.gif

Posted by: thekohser

The author, Corbett, is a fellow with the PRSA. The PRSA is fairly systematically knuckling under to the Wikipedia "community", and we all know where that will lead for individual member firms in the PRSA. They'll come to realize on their own that the Wikipedia community is mostly insane, and so the firms will find their own way (again) and learn ways to make Wikipedia reflect an actual "neutral" point of view (if such a thing even exists).

Posted by: Fusion

QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 3rd February 2012, 2:37pm) *

learn ways to make Wikipedia reflect an actual "neutral" point of view (if such a thing even exists).

I had a problem when I started with English Wikipedia. My English was quite poor then and I was very confused with much of what I read. Then I discovered that Wikipedians often use words in a sense other than the dictionary meaning. People here will be familiar with "harass", "outing", "civility", "legal threat" and so on. Undoubtedly "neutral" is another example. It seems to mean at best "reflect all points of view, even the insane ones, and do not try to discuss their relative merits".

Posted by: EricBarbour

Book, Greg. Get a book out.

Then you'll have a pile of dead tree to send to the PR people. They have to notice that.