A wiki is an online source that allows anyone to publish his or her own information about any topic. According to Wikipedia, the term wiki is derived from the Hawaiian word for “fast” and is an acronym for “What I Know Is.”
The first known wiki was published in 1995 on the Web site WikiWikiWeb. Wikis quickly expanded into the business world. Companies recognized their abilities to quickly communicate among employees. They utilized this ease and replaced the intranet with wikis. Since then, wiki has made its mark in the technological world. In 2007, it was even added to the Oxford English Dictionary.
They are incredibly convenient and have endless information all at one location in the vast universe of cyberspace. Anyone can contribute information, resulting in a more comprehensive encyclopedia entry.
However, this is the primary Achilles heel of the wiki. If anyone can anonymously publish information, how do you know if it is accurate?
Wikipedia came across this problem in 2005. In May of 2005, Brian Chase posted erroneous information about his colleague journalist John Seigenthaler Sr. Chase accused Seigenthaler of involvement in the assassinations of both President John F. Kennedy and Robert F. Kennedy. The post remained on Wikipedia for four months until it was discovered.
This false entry is also known as “trolling” or the intentional vandalism of the site. Wikipedia approaches false posting with the attitude that incorrect information is easier to delete than it is to deter. Misleading information is the chief reason why professors ask their students to use sources other than Wikipedia. Yet, with such an accessible Web site, is this fair? Wikipedia is the one-stop shop for any and all information.
All credibility is not lost though. Public relations practitioners are employing wikis to communicate with one another and gauge opinions. The New PR/Wiki Web site is one such site. PR professionals blog and communicate with one another via this site.
However, new technology has made the “anonymous” posts not so anonymous anymore. Identifying IP addresses has shed light on PR practitioners contributing information on wikis that either benefit their own organization or slur another.
Wikis are a fascinating concept. They can potentially offer so much useful information. With the growth in popularity of private wikis, the possibilities of this expanding technology are endless. Supervising the accuracy of posts is the obstacle preventing the breakthrough of the wiki.
Question: If the most extensive information I could find about wikis was on Wikipedia, how much should you trust this article?
All credibility is not lost though. Public relations practitioners are employing wikis to communicate with one another and gauge opinions. The New PR/Wiki Web site is one such site. PR professionals blog and communicate with one another via this site.
However, new technology has made the “anonymous” posts not so anonymous anymore. Identifying IP addresses has shed light on PR practitioners contributing information on wikis that either benefit their own organization or slur another.
Wikis are a fascinating concept. They can potentially offer so much useful information. With the growth in popularity of private wikis, the possibilities of this expanding technology are endless. Supervising the accuracy of posts is the obstacle preventing the breakthrough of the wiki.
Question: If the most extensive information I could find about wikis was on Wikipedia, how much should you trust this article?
For more information, visit:
http://www.thenewpr.com/wiki/pmwiki.ph
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki
http://www.forbes.com/2007/08/15/wikipedia-editiing-publishing-tech-security-cx_ag_0815wiki.html
http://www.thenewpr.com/wiki/pmwiki.ph
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki
http://www.forbes.com/2007/08/15/wikipedia-editiing-publishing-tech-security-cx_ag_0815wiki.html
By: Allison Key
3 comments:
I agree with the unfairness of students not being allowed to use Wikipedia as a reference. However, Wikipedia is still an excellent starting point for students. There are almost always links to outside sources which are considered more reliable. Because of that, Wikipedia can still be a student's best friend!
(That comment was posted by Rachel Atcheson)
When researching something, the first thing people do is a google search. Usually, a Wikipedia entry is the first (or almost first) result. Sometimes it is the only result with well organized information. Given that mostly all of the Wikipedia entries contain outside sources, it should be considered a reliable source. Also, the amount of academics accessing Wikipedia daily ensures that it will be peer edited constantly. Wikipedia continues to become more reliable and widely accepted.
Post a Comment