Microsoft tries to hire paid contributers to rewrite Wikipedia articles

[mandy]

I was a little surprised to receive email a couple of days ago from Microsoft saying they wanted to contract someone independent but friendly (me) for a couple of days to provide more balance on Wikipedia concerning ODF/OOXML. I am hardly the poster boy of Microsoft partisanship! Apparently they are frustrated at the amount of spin from some ODF stakeholders on Wikipedia and blogs.

I think I’ll accept it: FUD enrages me and MS certainly are not hiring me to add any pro-MS FUD, just to correct any errors I see...

full article: http://www.oreillynet.com/xml/blog/2007/...offer.html

[mandy]

A related article:

Microsoft's gaffe in paying someone to post Wikipedia entries raises a question: Why is it so bad to pay someone to contribute or correct encyclopedia entries? Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales in an interview claims companies are likely doing just that, but the site should not give up trying to prevent public relations efforts from appearing...

Wales was asked why it mattered if Microsoft or anyone else paid to have copy written on Wikipedia, since there's no guarantee that the site's vigorous editors and moderators would let it remain.

He called that notion akin to a city with stellar trash collection telling its denizens to go ahead and litter, since the garbage wouldn't be around long...

full article: http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/55371.html

[jezebel]

Microsoft's gaffe in paying someone to post Wikipedia entries raises a question: Why is it so bad to pay someone to contribute or correct encyclopedia entries?

Because if a company or politician hires a writer to contribute to an entry on the company the result will be a useless encyclopedia full of biased entries that resemble press releases.  DUH! 

[amy]

[quote author=jezebel link=topic=6784.msg41367#msg41367 date=1169862063]
if a company or politician hires a writer to contribute to an entry on the company the result will be a useless encyclopedia full of biased entries that resemble press releases.  DUH! 
[/quote]

:ditto:

[accentnepal]

[quote author=jezebel link=topic=6784.msg41367#msg41367 date=1169862063]

Microsoft's gaffe in paying someone to post Wikipedia entries raises a question: Why is it so bad to pay someone to contribute or correct encyclopedia entries?

Because if a company or politician hires a writer to contribute to an entry on the company the result will be a useless encyclopedia full of biased entries that resemble press releases.  DUH!  [/quote]

Why the he[[ do you think Micr0sh!t wants to do it-- to promote Lynux?? Of course, the idea is to slowly place more favorable ideas, knowing some will stick, then more - learning from the last. Eventually they plan to win control - that is their standard operating procedure {CONTROL}.

They allowed the information that they were doing this become public --- there is what I don't understand. So easy to infiltrate the editors without ever giving a hint of their intentions. Could it be a little trace of ethics???

....Naw.

He called that notion akin to a city with stellar trash collection telling its denizens to go ahead and litter, since the garbage wouldn't be around long...

Smart man.

[BellisimaJ.]

Because if a company or politician hires a writer to contribute to an entry on the company the result will be a useless encyclopedia full of biased entries that resemble press releases.  DUH!

:ditto:

So easy to infiltrate the editors without ever giving a hint of their intentions. Could it be a little trace of ethics???

....Naw.

I think it was simply a stupid move on their part, considering how suspect their ethics are. 8)