Chicagoist: BP's Wikiality

guest

Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:05:00 -0600

This post is Bullshit whats the big deal?? What am I supposed to be pissed about? This site is taking a slow dive to the cold outskirts of hell. "It does add a new wrinkle to the drama..." Really? How so?? Or are you hoping it will? If you want people to hate corporate America or fox news, then post a story about fox news changing words around. It's not difficult to click the link and discover that NYtimes did, greenpeace did, etc... You can also see at the top of the page all the organizations that have linked to that guy's 'scanner' page- They run the political spectrum- ultra conservative to liberal wackjobs- I still don't get the point of this post after writing this long reply. What a joke.

guest

Tue, 28 Aug 2007 13:25:21 -0600

Actually, their edits were pretty fair.

guest

Tue, 28 Aug 2007 12:40:59 -0600

oh the horror! where is the outrage at wikipedia editing the wikipedia entry?

guest

Tue, 28 Aug 2007 12:39:32 -0600

Which is why I always go there to do research for my dissertation. I thought your paper "My Time as a Jagoff, a Year Posting in the Chicagoist Comment Section" was wonderful!

guest

Tue, 28 Aug 2007 11:04:09 -0600

There's corporate and political spin taking place on Wikipedia?! Say it isn't so! I always thought their entries were carefully vetted, which is why I always go there to do research for my dissertation.

Spook

Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:39:57 -0600

The story might be a week old, but I think its more about recaps for public debate

guest

Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:04:32 -0600

5: Good points, though I think all the edits are interesting, including those done from media Web sites. And this story is more than a week old. I wonder who is coming to Chicagoist and learning about this for the first time. Do some people actually rely on this site for real news?

guest

Tue, 28 Aug 2007 09:53:33 -0600

So, if I understand this; BP indicating that they are NOT discharging more ammonia into the lake, when in fact they are NOT going to discharge more ammonia into the lake, on a website set up to provide such information in the very manner specified, by editing entries, is bad and/or wrong how?? I can understand if they edited the entry to say they were not going to discharge this stuff, if in fact they were going to, maybe then you have a story. The more interesting story from this is the organizations that edit entries- you conveniently left off the democratic party, UC itself, environmental groups etc...(but of course that wouldn't play into your 'hate corporations and conservative ideas' shananigans).

guest

Tue, 28 Aug 2007 09:52:26 -0600

My god, such power.

Spook

Tue, 28 Aug 2007 09:45:17 -0600

Kevin are you trying to make a statement about corporate power in America?

guest

Tue, 28 Aug 2007 09:18:52 -0600

It's = it is. Its = possessive. I don't know why you keep making this mistake.

pantagrapher

Tue, 28 Aug 2007 09:15:15 -0600

[Insert my obligatory outrage comment here.]