"John Seigenthaler Sr. was the assistant to Attorney General Robert Kennedy in the early 1960's. For a brief time, he was thought to have been directly involved in the Kennedy assassinations of both John, and his brother, Bobby. Nothing was ever proven."Yikes. The really terrible thing is that the sentences are complete character smears, as Mr. Seigenthaler, now 80 years old, writes. He was informed about the Wikipedia article by his son, an NBC News journalist.
In my opinion, Wikipedia is the best reference I've ever come across. It's far superior to Google or any other search engine, and trumps printed encyclopedias in its accessibility and up-to-date (literally) information. All this from a mostly volunteer effort. For those who are unfamiliar with the concept, a wiki refers to a web page where people collaborate to create and edit the content. It's like an online whiteboard. Wikipedia uses that idea to allow people who are expert in an area to contribute to a particular article. Of course, there are controversies and the content for especially hot-topic entries (which carry a disclaimer) often changes. To see this in action, take a look at this nascent entry on extraordinary rendition.
Anyway, the point is that Wikipedia is a great method of harnessing the Internet to provide "truth," which is much derided from the former information establishment. So what to think about the false entry on Mr Seigenthaler? He has a point, which I am sure is fully appreciated by Wikipedia managers. But the point I would make is that not only can he quickly contest the information (and correct it, luckily), but that hundreds of blogs and news sites are talking about his case just days after the discovery ... a phenomena not possible without the Internet. Instead of reigning in the marketplace of ideas, let's expand and strengthen it.
No comments:
Post a Comment