Kohs on Akahele, "The persistence of misinformation" Options

[GlassBeadGame]

It Monday and Akahele continues to deliver on time. This time Greg is up to bat. Akahele continues last weeks targeting of a more general audience but Greg's article has all the charm and story telling we have come to expect from him over the last couple of years. He focuses in on the how consumers of information have failed to develop the kind of skills needed to keep up with the flood of online information.

Wikipedia, Greg explains relies on this gap. It brags about it's accuracy relative to other reference works while disclaiming that no article is better than it's sources. But look at all those sources, surely this is trustworth. Wink wink, nod nod.

Greg's tool to debunk this is detailed case studies of persistent and serious errors. He begins with blatantly false claim about Lincoln's attendance at the first Republican convention in Greg's boyhood home town of Jackson, Michigan:

So, Wikipedia had a falsehood stuck in place for 601 days, on an article we estimate to have been viewed over 89,000 times before finally being fixed. The misinformation surrounded the earliest political career of perhaps the most important American individual of all time. But nobody spotted it for over six hundred days.
---Greg Kohs, The Persistence of Misinformation (Akahele)

Greg's skillful use of the case study works it's magic and is most convincing. But any reader must wonder about why anyone would care to place the misinformation in the first place. This is the part that would take every bit of Greg's skills to make intelligible to a non-Wikipedian audience. Tell about the hundreds of vandal patrolers defending the borders of this magic kingdom, even though better means are readily available to make all of this thankless work unnecessary. Explain how this throws out a challenge to others, often every bit as knowledgeable about the workings of Wikipedia, to engage in ever more clever and sophisticated vandalism. Maybe top it off with a case study of someone caught working both sides of the patrol/vandal fence.

Make them understand that when they turn to Wikipedia for information what they are actually viewing is the score board of an online game.

[Kato]

Another good read, and of course, I support all the arguments.

[LaraLove]

Impressive writing skill from Greg, as expected. GBG did well to praise. Good use of examples and I think it can be understood by those who don't necessarily understand Wikipedia. Nice work, Greg.

[Lar]

Another good article.

Greg's skillful use of the case study works it's magic and is most convincing. But any reader must wonder about why anyone would care to place the misinformation in the first place. This is the part that would take every bit of Greg's skills to make intelligible to a non-Wikipedian audience. Tell about the hundreds of vandal patrolers defending the borders of this magic kingdom, even though better means are readily available to make all of this thankless work unnecessary. Explain how this throws out a challenge to others, often every bit as knowledgeable about the workings of Wikipedia, to engage in ever more clever and sophisticated vandalism. Maybe top it off with a case study of someone caught working both sides of the patrol/vandal fence.

Make them understand that when they turn to Wikipedia for information what they are actually viewing is the score board of an online game.

GBG: If Greg or one of the other current Akahele-ians doesn't make this case (and you've made a VERY compelling case for making the case, if you see what I mean)... perhaps you should collaborate with someone?

To your point about the futility of it all: there is nothing more frustrating in life than knowing that you can solve a problem, by using the right tool, if only you would be allowed to.

It is said that for every aphorism there is an equal and opposite aphorism... This is one of those time. Most of the time I am all in favor of sticking with what works, because better is the enemy of good enough, and good enough is good enough. But this time, it's good enough that ... isn't.

[thekohser]

Thank you for the supportive notes. I've been struggling with getting over a case of walking pneumonia, so I was mindful that this was certainly not my best possible work (on a deadline).

The COMMENTS field is open on Akahele, for anyone who wants to explore this notion of being "denied the proper tool" to nurture a culture of civil society.

[LaraLove]

Thank you for the supportive notes. I've been struggling with getting over a case of walking pneumonia, so I was mindful that this was certainly not my best possible work (on a deadline).

The COMMENTS field is open on Akahele, for anyone who wants to explore this notion of being "denied the proper tool" to nurture a culture of civil society.

Great. An invitation for Moulton to turn yet another discussion into something no one gives half a shit about: His deserved ban.

[Milton Roe]

Thank you for the supportive notes. I've been struggling with getting over a case of walking pneumonia, so I was mindful that this was certainly not my best possible work (on a deadline).

I've got the walkin' pneumonia,
And the Akahele blues...


Sorry, couldn't resist.

[Moulton]

Slow down, you move too fast,
Got to make Akahele last...

[GlassBeadGame]

Let’s talk dirty in Hawaiian
Whisper in my ear
Kicka puka maaka waawaa heenee
Are the words I long to hear
Lay your coconut on my ticky
Whata hecka mooka mooka dear.
Let’s talk dirty in Hawaiian
Say the words I long to hear.

John Prine, Let's Talk Dirty in Hawaiian

[Jon Awbrey]

I have many questions …

Next Question 1. Who would want a system in which misinformation can persist?

Next Question 2. And Why?

Next Question 3. How come I always have to be the one who asks the next question?

Jon Awbrey, Saint Patrick's Day, 2009

[Jon Awbrey]

Followup to Greg's responses …

Greg,

What you say is true, so partial credit is due, but what I have in mind is the Cui Bono or the Market Research question: “If you could build it, who would beat a path to your door?”

That is, who would be in the market for a system in which one can control which misinformation persists?

Jon Awbrey, 19 March 2009, Zero Hour

[Moulton]

Jon Awbrey asks, “Who would be in the market for a system in which one can control which information persists?”

There are four kinds of professionals who might be in that market.

One is the Public Relations Specialist.

Another is the Propagandist.

A third is a new kind of technician who specializes in Search Engine Optimization (SEO). Their objective is to tweak content so as to make it rise in the Google PageRank calculations.

And a fourth is a new kind of technician who specializes in Content Management Systems (CMS).

Notably, there are two notorious former Wikipedia Admins who were engaged in SEO and CMS and who got into big trouble for their zeal in manipulating the system for unencyclopedic purposes.