[WikiEN-l] The counterattack of the PR companies

[David Gerard]

On 18 April 2012 12:48, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> PR people who edited Wikipedia get crucified. Counterattack: reduce
> trust in Wikipedia.
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120417113527.htm
> Paper: http://www.prsa.org/Intelligence/PRJournal/


On the CREWE Facebook page, Andrew Lih from WIkipedia has asked Dr
diStaso to correct her claims. His request:

‘Thanks, but doesn’t that mean the correct conclusion should be: “60%
of respondents who identified an article about their client found at
least one error”? That’s very different than: “60% of Wikipedia
articles about PR clients had factual errors” even more different
than: “60% of Wikipedia articles had factual errors” Doesn’t this
warrant a significant correction?’

Dr diStaso has, instead, reinforced the wrong impression in quotes
given to ABC News today:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2012/04/wikipedia-survey-shows-60-percent-of-entries-have-errors-and-public-relations-people-cant-correct-them/

I've asked her as well to please take the opportunity to urgently
correct the impression her work is giving. I'm sure there will be no
problem with this.


- d.