Marc Riddell wrote:
on 3/4/07 8:28 AM, Guy Chapman aka JzG at guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
Because he who pays the piper calls the tune.
That is an incredibly broad statement, Guy. If the persons who pay me called the tune, they would not receive what they are paying for. And, besides, if they tried - it would fall on deaf ears.
You're one in a million, and that's not flattery. :-) While it's theoretically possible to have unbiased edits from a paid source, in practice it hasn't gone well so far, and in these days of corporations looking for every imaginable advertising venue, people are ultra-paranoid.
I think if a leading historian were to announce that he had received a commission to work on a company's WP article, editing under his own name, people would struggle with that one. The historian's overt participation would be a boost to WP's credibility, and the historian is putting personal reputation on the line, but it's also setting a precedent to later accept paid edits from a less-leading historian, then the underpaid instructor at the community college, then the "Company Historian" in the marketing department.
Stan