Quote of the day

“What really weirds me out about all of this is that everyone acts like i’m dead and incapable of speaking for myself. It is culturally inappropriate for me to edit my entry, even when there are parts of it that are dead wrong. No one asks me to fact check – journalists matter more than me. I understand why i shouldn’t have the right to get rid of negative commentary about me, but wouldn’t it make sense to allow living “notables” correct facts? Am i not the leading expert on the biographical facts of my life?
–danah boyd’s feeling whipped by her Wikipedia bio and how* facts* from Fox News seem to trump other data sources in her bio

Latest Comments

  1. Randy says:

    I have NEVER seen a substantial Wikipedia entry about a subject of nuance or complexity that wasn’t riddled with inaccuracies and bias. But I hardly think that Fox News or any conservative source is the main culprit to point to when it comes to Wikipedia b.s.; it’s biased so far to the left it isn’t funny.
    Nonetheless, Fox News is supposed to have better journalistic standards than Wikipedia; if they have released incorrect information they should correct it; and I would be surprised if they would not. But who is responsible for posting things sourced from Fox News (or anywhere else) on Wikipedia, and who is responsible for tracking a repetition of an inaccuracy that may have been corrected elsewhere but is repeated on Wikipedia (and, given the nature of Wikipedia and its contributors, doubtless linked and quoted many other places on the Web)? To say that if the source of the original error is a conventional news outlet that they have a greater responsibility for how their material is used, compared to, for example, individuals who consciously and deliberately post opinion to Wikipedia as fact is disingenuous.
    Lastly, it is mildly amusing to see one of the people who have been happily complicit in the bias pervading Wikipedia and much of new media get bit in the ass in turn. If you are in fact “notable,” I got news for you that shouldn’t be news: N.Y. Times v. Sullivan applies to you, too, and Fox News or Justice Roberts/Alito/Scalia/Thomas or whoever your villian of choice is didn’t do it to you; the liberals did.

  2. Jay says:

    Not to be unkind or anything, but who on earth is Danah Boyd? Guess I’ll go read her Wikipedia bio!

  3. Randy says:

    More to the point, what are the inaccuracies she is complaining about? It’s hard to see much inconsistency between the information on Wikipedia and the information on her own website – which is not to say that there AREN’T inaccuracies, I just don’t know and can hardly imagine what they are.

  4. Dimitar Vesselinov says:

    Vision: Wikipedia and the Future of Free Culture
    Jimmy Wales

Latest Comments

Comments are closed.