Comments on: Don’t Like It http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2007/08/16/dont-like-it/ Where There's Snow, There's Firepower Thu, 04 Dec 2008 06:57:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Brad http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2007/08/16/dont-like-it/#comment-9618 Brad Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:52:38 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=1303#comment-9618 The risk of bad publicity brought about by internet access has been around for at least 10 years now. First it was chat rooms and instant messages, then leaking internal memos on FuckedCompany, and now blogs. Various companies have indeed taken hits, but only the stupid ones cut off internet access and most likely suffered. The rest used the technology to their advantage in creating their own blogs, making their companies more transparent, and thus being more honest about the issues. <a href="http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/15.04/wired40_ceo.html" rel="nofollow">Wired magazine dedicated an entire issue to this phenomenon. </a> To apply it to the wikipedia spin jobs, I think that companies will authorize a PR representative to make edits. Instead of some off-the-cuff crap from some bored desk jockey named Brad, they'd get perhaps, some thoughtful, well-reasoned statement that might spur important discussion or bring new information to light. However, the main reason why I liked the site is that simultaneously exposes multiple devils: corporate & political spin, media bias, and the giant information free-for-all / crap-fest that Wikipedia has become - just to name a few. The risk of bad publicity brought about by internet access has been around for at least 10 years now. First it was chat rooms and instant messages, then leaking internal memos on FuckedCompany, and now blogs. Various companies have indeed taken hits, but only the stupid ones cut off internet access and most likely suffered. The rest used the technology to their advantage in creating their own blogs, making their companies more transparent, and thus being more honest about the issues. Wired magazine dedicated an entire issue to this phenomenon.

To apply it to the wikipedia spin jobs, I think that companies will authorize a PR representative to make edits. Instead of some off-the-cuff crap from some bored desk jockey named Brad, they’d get perhaps, some thoughtful, well-reasoned statement that might spur important discussion or bring new information to light.

However, the main reason why I liked the site is that simultaneously exposes multiple devils: corporate & political spin, media bias, and the giant information free-for-all / crap-fest that Wikipedia has become - just to name a few.

]]>