Wikipedia | Why encyclopaedic row speaks volumes about the old guard
The Observer | BusinessJohn Naughton: "By all laws of reference-work publishing, Wikipedia ought to be a disaster. Yet it is exactly the opposite - an exceedingly useful online reference work often consulted by this columnist and countless others."
Critics of Wikipedia and the public creation of knowledge take the stance derived from "the conventional wisdom of managerial capitalism that we think the only way to do things is via hierarchical, top-down, tightly controlled organisations'.
In defense of Wiki against establishment behemoths Naughton suggests that you "Try looking up tsunami in the online edition of Britannica (www.britannica.com) and then in Wikipedia. While you're at it, note the extensive entry the latter has for the recent disaster and compare it with the video provided by Britannica of the tsunami that devastated Hawaii - in 1946."
He finds most "interesting is the social process that underpins the project."
He quotes Clay Shirky "'Wikipedia is an experiment in social openness, and it will stand or fall with the ability to manage that experiment ... Wikipedia makes no claim to expertise or authority other than use-value, and if you want to vote against it, don't use it. Everyone else will make the same choice for themselves, and the aggregate decisions of the population will determine the outcome of the project. And five years from now, when the Wikipedia is essential infrastructure, we'll hardly remember what the fuss was about.'
posted by Jen @ 7:08 am
<< Home