PressEthic

I like wikipedia. I’ve used it in this blog to fill in bits of trivia. But because it’s open-source, there is a pretty big risk of people screwing around with the content.

Romanesko tipped readers off to a memo from the New York Times. Apparently, so many people have been emailing the Times with Wikipedia’s errors that the Times no longer considers Wikipedia suitably reliable for fact-checking.

These emails were prompted by a Times Article about John Seigenthaler Sr., who in a Wikipedia article was accused of being involved in the Kennedy assassinations.

This brings up a lot of questions. Is the abuse of an open-source reference a sign that “citizen journalism” isn’t trustworthy? Is this technically libel? How can it be prevented when Wikipedia is anonymous (though unregistered users can no longer create new articles on Wikipedia)?

Personally, I plan to do what has been recommended all along – use Wikipedia as a starting point, then follow up with a second source.

And rest assured: our Professor Adam Penenberg’s article seems fairly accurate.