Ayatollahs of the Internet
Several media sites are reporting that Microsoft has been requesting that third parties "edit" several Microsoft-related Wikipedia entries to make it more favorable for them. This process, which is a variation of "astroturf", (fake grass roots), seems to be unethical, given the new morality of the Internet. The theory behind these collaborative sites, like Wikipedia, is that each entry is the result of a spontaneous gesture by an uncompromised third party, spurred on by a genuine desire to enighten and share with others.
I think that's crap. Everyone has an axe to grind. Although many people genuinely write reviews of books and movies, products or technology, from a love of sharing, many do not. And all of those who are biased are not necessarily astroturfers working for evil PR firms. Many netizens have hate-hate relationships with people, companies and even operating systems, and will go out of their way to trash their targets every chance they get, regardless of the subject. I've been the target of attacks like these several times over the years as have several other writers that I know. How are these little Ayatollahs of the Internet any different than slick willy PR Geeks? Read Slashdot sometime with a sensitivity towards a priori hate and nastiness and you'll see what I mean.
There was a popular bumper sticker in the '60s labelled "QUESTION AUTHORITY". I encourage people to apply that sentiment to what anyone writes on the Internet, especially on Wikipedia, human naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft being what it is. The problem of validating quality on the Internet is poised to become a big one, IMHO.
BTW, if anyone looks up the Microsoft Wikipedia entry as of this morning, they will see this on the right hand sidebar describing the company:
Microsoft Copulation
Type Public (NASDAQ: MSFT)
Founded Albuquerque (April 4, 1975)[1]
Headquarters Redmond, Washington, USA
Key people Salman Mohamed, Co-founder
Posted on January 23, 2007
