Wikipedia has become an essential source of information for millions of online users. A little too informative for some:
"The staff of U.S. Rep Marty Meehan wiped out references to his broken term-limits pledge as well as information about his huge campaign war chest in an independent biography of the Lowell Democrat on a Web site that bills itself as the 'world's largest encyclopedia,' The Sun has learned.
"The Meehan alterations on Wikipedia.com represent just two of more than 1,000 changes made by congressional staffers at the U.S. House of Representatives in the past six month. Wikipedia is a global reference that relies on its Internet users to add credible information to entries on millions of topics.
"Matt Vogel, Meehan's chief of staff, said he authorized an intern in July to replace existing Wikipedia content with a staff-written biography of the lawmaker.
"The change deleted a reference to Meehan's campaign promise to surrender his seat after serving eight years, a pledge Meehan later eschewed. It also deleted a reference to the size of Meehan's campaign account, the largest of any House member at $4.8 million, according to the latest data available from the Federal Election Commission."
The nature of Wikipedia allows anyone to enter, change or add information. This story simply proves that the service is far from a totally reliable source.
"The Meehan alterations on Wikipedia.com represent just two of more than 1,000 changes made by congressional staffers at the U.S. House of Representatives in the past six month. Wikipedia is a global reference that relies on its Internet users to add credible information to entries on millions of topics.
"Matt Vogel, Meehan's chief of staff, said he authorized an intern in July to replace existing Wikipedia content with a staff-written biography of the lawmaker.
"The change deleted a reference to Meehan's campaign promise to surrender his seat after serving eight years, a pledge Meehan later eschewed. It also deleted a reference to the size of Meehan's campaign account, the largest of any House member at $4.8 million, according to the latest data available from the Federal Election Commission."
The nature of Wikipedia allows anyone to enter, change or add information. This story simply proves that the service is far from a totally reliable source.
3 Comments:
Brownie, I guess it's a matter of context. I have no particular opposition to display of a flag, but should it be a fashion accessory? If it is employed a garment, what message is one sending?
Mind, I'm not one to hold flags sacrosanct. Mark Twain once said "Sacred cows make the best hamburger." I grew up in the USA, being a kidkid in the Vietnam War era 1960s & 70s. Having a US flag sewn in to one's patched and tatty blue jeans was very much a valid political protest, indicative of the tatty state of the nation when embroiled in an unnecessary and invalid war. Burning a flag is a relatively harmless but strong political message, too. Where I come from, they call it freedom of speech.
However, it you're pissed as a newt and wrapped in the Aussie flag, just what is it you're telling the world?
Wow, Ant, big story there. Wikipedia may not be reliable because of its very nature. International scoop!
Orang : have you used Wikipedia much? Why not go to that very entry and have a look at the way they deal with it? And see how much bias you can pick.
Post a Comment
<< Home