Image: Flickr, CC
Advertisement
- Corporate communicators want to do the right thing.
- Communicators engaged in ethical practice have a lot to contribute.
- Current Wikipedia policy does not fully understand #1 and #2, owing to the activities of some bad actors and a general misunderstanding of public relations in general.
- Accurate Wikipedia entries are in the public interest.
Advertisement
Advertisement
So do you think more PR professionals should be using Wikipedia?I think the PR industry in general needs to attain a visceral understanding of hacker and open-source culture if it is going to continue to be meaningful in an always-on, hierarchy-averse, release-early-release-often world. Mastery of Wikipedia norms is certainly one way to build these instincts.Most certainly, PR professionals need to address Wikipedia--respectfully and transparently--in the course of responsibly managing an organization's online reputation. This requires more than simply addressing a particular Wikipedia article itself, but really getting a handle on how decisions are made and consensus is achieved across all Wikipedia sites.Is there anything a PR agent or firm should not do on Wikipedia? Is there any standing set of 'best practices' that they should keep in mind?Getting the obvious stuff out of the way, a company representative should proactively disclose his or her affiliations and interests in participating in Wikipedia. Generally speaking, there's no reason they should be in the mainspace of an article.“While Wikipedians have always been sensitive to the idea that there are corporate barbarians about to storm the gates, this simply hasn't happened."
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement