PR industry to "cooperate" with Wikipedia Options

[thekohser]

There are a number of well-timed counter-movements in the wake of the Bell Pottinger flap, where consortia of PR industry leaders are going to try to "reach out" to Wikipedia and gain consensus on how PR firms can dutifully and ethically interact with Wikipedia.

I have a feeling that in about 6 months there will be a lot of heartbroken, grieved people in the PR industry.

[Selina]

wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Please.2C_keep_the_bunny
^ thekohser, if you think it's all about you, it honestly isn't, if anything the fact you bring it to more attention is probably a good thing, because you're pretty benign compared to what it could be. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) It's like I said on my talk page before when people were telling me to stop fighting it, it well, really is pointless for any small group of individuals to try because they'll always be outnumbered.

It will likely end up far, far, worse than it is now, since I can't really work out what changes they could actually do, if any, other than writing the whole thing off as a failed experiment... It may be easy to say nah, now, but if you read about what is being built, and the potential (check the links I made), well, yeah. I'm kind of skeptical of religion but it does have a good purpose sometimes in that at least you'll have a conscience from doing anything really creepy even if you occasionally forget the long list of Jesus quotes about intentionally deceiving people. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

[jsalsman]

It may be easy to say nah, now, but if you read about what is being built, and the potential (check the links I made), well, yeah.

Organized sockfarms will always draw attention to themselves. No amount of organized collective effort is going to be able to counter spontaneous zeitgeist. Political ads are still more effective when they are direct and out in the open.