News and views from the More on freedom of speech vs. freedom from speech
Courtesy Librarian in the Middle, I've learned about a pretty terrible Wikipedia gaffe. Wikipedia is the popular, free online encyclopedia anyone can edit and contribute to. It seems that someone wrote an article on John Seigenthaler, Sr., a journalist and editor, and in his early years, an assistant to Attorney General Robert Kennedy. The article contained dangerous falsehoods, implying that Seigenthaler was involved in the assassinations of both John and Bobby Kennedy. When he tried to determine the identity of his spurious "biographer," Seigenthaler learned that Wikipedia contributors can remain entirely anonymous - hiding behind IP addresses that neither Wikipedia nor ISPs are required to connect to real human-being identities. To make matters worse, websites Reference.com and Answers.com picked up the false information and republished it.
To Wikipedia's (sort of) credit, the revised article describes the entire drama and links to Seigenthaler's expose in USA Today. All this makes my head hurt. And makes me think I should share this sad tale as part of my website evaluation lessons.
To Wikipedia's (sort of) credit, the revised article describes the entire drama and links to Seigenthaler's expose in USA Today. All this makes my head hurt. And makes me think I should share this sad tale as part of my website evaluation lessons.
posted by franceylibrarian at 1:46 PM
2 Comments:
Where do you think is the line when Wikipedia is reliable/useful for academic research?
A week ago, I was working on an introduction to a paper on Kornei Chukovsky, the Soviet children's author. I had two paper sources that told me his parents' nationalities, but neither actually gave their names. So I used and cited the Wikipedia entry on him, which I suppose will stand till I find a new book.
Emily (Bruce...I suppose you've had quite a few new Emilys in two and a half years!)
Hoo boy. The answer, of course, is: it depends. Which I'm sure you know as well as I do. In your case, I'd say to keep looking for corroboration. Chances are, though, the information you found is perfectly valid.
Observation: when I'm looking for techie/computer info, I find that Wikipedia can be an excellent resource. But when the topic has the slightest bit of political or social overtone, that's when the problems crop up.
Thanks, (one and only) Emily!
Post a Comment
<< Home