[WikiEN-l] Daily Mail article on Sam Blacketer case

[Charles Matthews]

AGK wrote:
>> Gross inaccuracies that harm our public image? Not that I can see. Some of
>> the details are wrong - number of ArbCom cases for instance, but that's
>> pretty irrelevant to the story or indeed our reputation. Likewise with the
>> relationship between Wikimedia UK and the Foundation.
>>     
>
>
> (Belated reply to Andrew's post of one day ago.)
>
> The article certainly doesn't give a positive impression of us. It's quite
> clear to me that there are inaccuracies and that the article harms our
> public image. Wikipedia gets quite enough stick for being "totally
> unreliable" (and such) without the Mail spreading incorrect information
> about how we operate.
>   
But that, largely, is how the press operates - without regard for the 
impression Wikipedians would like to be given of Wikipedia. and with 
obvious inaccuracies (often exacerbated by the efforts of subeditors who 
know little about the topic itself). All that can be done with the press 
is to try to get your own spin in there, along with what they'll print 
anyway. 

Charles