• Negativity is increasing greatly over time.
• Length of entries has increased greatly as well
• Some of the negative content is “outsourced” from the
• The focus of articles has shifted.
Obviously, none of this can be good for companies. But besides the obvious repercussion of Wikipedia, I thought it was really interesting how the article referred to Wikipedia as “social media” But the similarities are there. Just like with social media sites, anyone can contribute to wikipedias. And when they do, Wikipedia make note of it and you are about to see who has contributed to whatever it is that you are looking up. It is this idea of user generated content that is evident in Wikipedia just as it is on twitter, youtube, blogger, or facebook.
“Today, Wikipedia has greatly improved its editing process and, thereby, its credibility. Most importantly: It is moving up on all popular search engines. If you google “Wal-Mart,” “Exxon Mobil,” or “Ford,” the Wikipedia entries on these companies will rank somewhere between 4th and 6th, right behind the official corporate websites. This means the “greedy international conglomerate,” the “disinformation tactics,” and the “slave labor in Cologne” are only a click away.”