Re: Democracy or Anarchy? Reassessing Wikipedia and the Validity of Information

Much of the discussion around Wikipedia involves two sides of the same coin. As a majority of us admit to using Wikipedia in order to seek out information, we all can recognize many of the positive and negative aspects to using the site.

On one hand, Wikipedia is an excellent tool that is easily accessible. I often use my cell phone in order to search terms, events, or find information on people through the web site. I find that this is an enormously useful aspect to the site, as information is able to be retrieved from anywhere in a matter of seconds, at any date or time.

Another positive point that users have commented on is the way in which Wikipedia helps to contribute to a more democratic public sphere where people are able to add their own knowledge on topics that they may be considered “experts” or “enthusiasts” of, even if they do not necessarily have a professional title that is in relation to the subject.

As mentioned in the initial module, rather than having a top down informational model, there is a large flow of information between the producers and consumers of content. In fact, the boundaries between the producer and consumer become rather blurred, as users are able to take in information simultaneously and just as easily as they project it.

While this may seem to take away from the legitimacy of information, it actually works to do the opposite. The notion behind the website is that people will work to provide information that is accurate and true. Since there are so many users who edit articles, there is less of a chance that information will be false, for fear of being scrutinized by a large community of Wiki experts and editors. (This is where the idea of the information watchdog comes into play).

The more negative aspects of Wikipedia involve the ease of access to information and how anyone can edit articles. Due to this fault, people must be aware of the way in which facts can easily be altered. In many of the comments, individuals have talked about the possibility of false information and the way in which it could cause negative outcomes for individuals.

Obviously there are many potential risks to using Wikipedia for retrieving information and individuals should be hesitant when using the site for research. However, as Wikipedia continues to monitor the site more and more frequently, the accuracy of information will continue to strengthen.

I personally think that it will be interesting to see if Wikipedia will ever reach the same standard of legitimacy of an encyclopedia website, such as Britannica or Open Site, and thus be allowed by educational institutions to be utilized as a scholarly source. Until that day comes, any information retrieved from the website should be taken with a grain of salt, or further researched via cited sources.

Thank you for your comments!