August 23, 2006
Wikipedia: Reliable Resource for Politics?
Wikipedia has quickly become a popular source of information on politicians and political candidates.
The chief benefit of a wiki is that it’s easier to update than regular Web pages. With a wiki, you simply click on the Edit button of a live wiki page and make the required changes right there. For the most part, the site's information is credible. If it isn't, the site includes functions to debate information and resolve disputes.
As the mid-term election nears resolving disputes on Wikipedia has become common. Last week the site briefly banned all editing of entries done from computers linked to congressional offices, after staffers on several campaigns were caught editing profiles.
Among the Politicians spotlighted in the media for doctoring their Wikipedia bios are Rep. Gil Gutknecht (R-MN), Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN), Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Rep. Jim Ryun (R-KS) and Sen. Sam Brownback (D-KS).
Some were caught erasing politically embarrassing facts and spinning their positions on issues, but it’s also the case that their political opponents change information online, straining Wikipedia's strength as a reliable resource.
"Our primary goal is neutrality," says Wayne Saewyc, a Wikipedia spokesman. But "in election years especially, people don't want the articles to be neutral."
As a user of the site I anticipate the information to be reliable and credible, but I tend to agree with Brian Hart, spokesman for Senator Brownback, "when a topic isn't controversial, it's a good source. With politics, it's like blogs: Everyone is trying to figure out the rules of the game."
Posted by Buzz Webster at August 23, 2006 04:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Comments
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)