Comments on: Why is Wikipedia anti small business? “Get Better PR”

By: Loraine Lawson

Loraine Lawson — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 11:59:16 +0000

Dan – While reading your post, I thought your conclusion would be that wikipedia reflects the interests of mass media and the money they can afford to spend on PR and advertising – not that the masses were suspicious of advertising. If wikipedia reflects the interests of the masses, and we find only major TV/movie/mainstream information on it, doesn’t this suggest that, in fact, people mistrust companies that do NOT use blatant advertising?

That would be the conclusion I would draw from Jimmy Wales’ remarks and your first two paragraphs.

The conclusion in the third paragraphs seems like a leap to me.

By: monkchips

monkchips — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:18:59 +0000

@leisa new world? what balls http://bit.ly/4sjvyt

This comment was originally posted on Twitter

By: vinnie mirchandani

vinnie mirchandani — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:52:10 +0000

unbelievable…if 25 of us bloggers with some following sendthim an email supporting you would he consider that good PR?

By: socialatwork

socialatwork — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 11:01:27 +0000

get citations from print publications???? RT @monkchips: Why is Wikipedia anti small business? “Get Better PR” http://bit.ly/4sjvyt

This comment was originally posted on Twitter

By: Jon Reed

Jon Reed — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 01:54:30 +0000

RedMonk should be on wikipedia, end of story. If Wales doesn’t see that, he needs to spend more time on @gapingvoid’s site studying the impact of microbrands, of which RedMonk is a very good example – not to mention the rise of independent analysts in the IT space, or the impact/innovation of freemium business models. RedMonk fits the bill for all three. Put RedMonk in wikipedia now or look small after the fact.

By: Christopher Mahan

Christopher Mahan — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 22:13:16 +0000

And now you know why, while an administrator at wikipedia since 2002, I rarely if ever go there anymore. I discovered that wikipedia is an extension of print. If it is in print, then it must be true, and if it is not, then it must not be. [Do you have a citation for that?]

I extend print to mean media, which means that if there is a movie about it produced by Sony or Universal Studio, then it must also be true. [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformers_%28film%29]], as well as music.

In the end, I realized that wikipedia is reflective of the interest of the masses, and since the masses are distrustful of small businesses or find them irrelevant (who cares about a PR firm in London when there is Lost on TV?), then they remove such listings, marking them as blatant advertising.

Now, why are the masses distrustful of blatant advertising? Mmm? Maybe they are right after all: a small business wants to just set up shop, make a wikipedia entry, and funnel large amounts of eyeballs to its website to pitch goods and services of dubious real value?

Maybe this is good for wikipedia to not allow the small businesses there.

By: dan_mcweeney

dan_mcweeney — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 19:50:21 +0000

Why is Wikipedia anti small business? “Get Better PR”:
I like Wikipedia a lot. But it infuriates me than while.. http://bit.ly/38uubh

This comment was originally posted on Twitter

By: PR, Public Relations & communications news and features

PR, Public Relations & communications news and features — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 19:19:50 +0000

[...] power of the mainstream media was cited by Red Monk analyst James Governor this week who had been having problems with [...]

By: Niraj

Niraj — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 19:09:48 +0000

Further to my note above, The issue is not Wikipedia specific. Any small firm has to go over the hump of establishing credibility – you can do this in several ways , one among them is getting a PR firm. You could also win a nobel prize and avoid PR

By: Niraj

Niraj — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 19:05:41 +0000

Is it PR or is it just the fact that there no realistic way to validate the extremely large pool of small businesses.

As an example , I run a small company, If Wikipedia quotes me – how does it know that that I am not a fly-by-night operator or even that I am not promoting an agenda.

Large Enterprises have already been vetted out of this basic validation