The principles of Wikinomics asserts that openness, which allows individuals to create content, is evident in the Web 2.0 model. Collaboration on the web has led to a variety of sites, including social media pages and Wikipedia. However, when can this user-created content be considered dishonest?
This issue is discussed in a Digiday article: PR managers are editing Wikipedia pages to show their brands in the best light. However, this form of astroturfing can be an unrealistic representation of an organization, which can be viewed as immoral.
There are two sides to this argument: on the one hand, one of the primary responsibilities of PR managers is to portray their brands positively. Sites such as Wikipedia are conducive to user-generated content, so why not create content that portrays a company in a positive light?
However, there is an inherent sense of responsibility with this content- readers generally believe the content written to be true, so it is expected that those who create content are being honest.
After this discovery, the Wikimedia Foundation has promised to try to stop these actions from occurring. However, this daunting task sounds near impossible- with an ever-growing number of articles on Wikipedia, it is difficult to fathom that the foundation can separate the honest information from the dishonest.
Hopefully, now that this information is more public, the foundation can make strides towards revealing true information.
No comments:
Post a Comment