Martin: The reliability and openness of Wikipedia has been questioned over the past several months. The idea the masses are smarter than mere individuals has some credibility. The corollary is also true.
Sure Wikipedia has errors. Errors are human. They can sneak in when trying to explain complex topic. They can creep in when trying to evaluate someone’s biography. Sometimes these are just honest differences of opinion. Other times they may reflect some bias of the writer.
To control swinging changes, Wikipedia is no longer as open as it once was. Some call this approach elitist and against the original openness of the idea. But when you play in a virtual sandbox where some people have more time and shout louder, they take over the sandbox. As a result, other people get pragmatic and look for solutions to remedy this. This might make Wikipedia more like the Encyclopedia Britannica its been compared with, but it doesn’t quash it as a resource. Neither is perfect.
Depending on your view, we have the fortune or misfortune, to like in an era when communication is rapidly changing. As new technologies for communicating emerge, so to new ways of communicating. The telegraph gave us the inverted pyramid style of newspaper reporting. Television, the sound byte. But these ways to communicate both took time to evolve. Now the focus seems more about the rapidity of communication and less about content.
What’s this brouhaha mean for social media marketing? It seems just this. Move ahead. Try something. Expect to make mistakes. Adjust. Try again. And at each step pay attention to your content. It’s still king.
Comments