The biggest irony is how our news publications summarized the titles :
The so called research "finds" that " 60 % of the respondents found that
their company articles on Wikipedia having factual errors" ..
But our new agencies conclude that "60 % of the Wikipedia entries contain
factual errors" !

Anyways don't expect any sympathies from the PR industry towards Wikipedia
! :)

On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Srikanth Lakshmanan <srik....@gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 14:32, CherianTinu Abraham 
> <tinucher...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> IANS : 60% Wikipedia entries contain factual errors
>
>
> Wonderful report I have ever seen. 6th grade kid would do far better in
> what is called comprehending the original statement. The irony is it talks
> of "factual errors".
>
> "" In fact, 60% of respondents who were familiar with their company or
> recent client’s Wikipedia article indicated that it article contained
> factual errors."" --> The actual statement from page 20 of the "research
> report"[1].
>
> Who were the people who responded? PR professionals, yes people who try to
> promote a brand / entity for money. End of the day its about Paid editing.
>
> [1] http://www.prsa.org/Intelligence/PRJournal/Documents/2012DiStaso.pdf
>
> --
> Regards
> Srikanth.L
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

Reply via email to