About
Wikipedia and its role in politics…
“(…) Wikipedia is committed to making
its articles as unbiased as possible. The aim is not to write articles from a
single objective point of view-this is a common misunderstanding of the
policy-but rather, to fairly and sympathetically present all views on an issue.”
This
is part of one of the policies of Wikipedia. It just reminds me to some sort of
“news” publication that went around social media in my country. Presidential
elections are going to take place in Paraguay in April, 21st and there is too
much debate not only about the candidates’ proposals but also about the
candidates’ doubtful backgrounds. There is not any concrete proof or evidence
but there are rumors and some past events which involves one of the candidates in
drug dealing and cigarette smuggling. The news publication (in Spanish) that was shared on
Facebook shows a screen shot of “Wikipedia” and said “According to Wikipedia,
Horacio Cartes (the presidential candidate) is a drug-dealer and a cigarette smuggler”.
I
have 2 observations about this issue:
1. From
my perception, I doubt that there is many people in my country who knows that
Wikipedia is not a, let’s say official, “reliable” source and rather is just a
platform where people collaborate with information about a variety of issues.
In fact, the article makes clear that but at the very end. In the fast pace we
live there might be some people who didn’t make it until the end of the article. I
am not defending or being against this candidate, but the consequences of this
fact are that people might believe what was included in Wikipedia and once it
went around social media or even become viral it might be hard to stop or make
people change their perception about this candidate.
2. Of
course, people working for his campaign detected this issue and they
immediately changed the information and now you can read that he is just a “businessman
and politician”. This led me to think how permanent or accurate the information
might be and how it would be interesting to have a tool or feature that allows
you to track these changes, at least to see, how the information about a same
topic was being shaped up along a certain time period. This is something that
one of our classmates, Wade, mentioned some time ago as well.
I think that the study mentioned in the reading “Peer
Production and Sharing” that noted that the “difference in accuracy was not
particularly great” among Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica might be too
optimistic. Whether is true that vandalism acts can be corrected within minutes
in Wikipedia, I can go now and just write back that this presidential candidate
was a drug dealer and it can become an endless back and forth between the
supposedly “vandals” and the “supposedly”
true about this person.
About
Reddit…an interesting site to explore and play with…
The
reading also provided good examples of Slashdot, Project Gutenberg and other
sites. I think one of the most current and commented sites that serves sort of
the same function as those mentioned in the reading is Reddit. This site was
created in 2005 and serves as a portal where people submit links or stories and
others, the “redditors” can comment and rate them. In addition, the site offers
cool features I think like one named IamA where one user who has an interesting
life experience, job or something uncommon allows “redditors” to ask this
people questions about anything or almost anything as they said in their site.
I think this might be an interesting new site to explore, I already joined and I
think they’ve done a good job in creating a diverse community. This example of
Reddit also shows as the reading described that the merely function of posting
a story from another site into a particular one is “itself an act of relevance
production”.
This
is a video that talks a little bit more about Reddit and they show very cool
activities they have done to create community...
Sources:
The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and
Freedom (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2006).
I agree that there is definitely some errors on Wikioedia but as we've talked about in class, I think the website overall is astonishing with the amount of information people have collected. It's a great example as mentioned in the article of how people all over the world who have never met can work together and build something via the web.
ReplyDeleteThe crown sydney epicurean & mr.c. mr. fun88 fun88 10cric 10cric 1XBET 1XBET 875yankees game odds【VIP】www.slingo casinode deposit bonus
ReplyDelete