No matter how many times someone (or some company) gets in a conflict-of-interest editing controversy with Wikipedia, the hits just keep on coming.
The New York Times
is the latest to join organizations like Bell Pottinger, BP, Newt Gingrich and a host of others in trying to surreptitiously edit Wikipedia pages. NYT reporters’ pages have been edited for years, according to BuzzFeed
Many of the edits seem fairly minor, such as blanking a section on a reporter’s personal life, changing a reporter’s job title, or updating where Gail Collins has taught.
As noted, the edits are mostly innocuous, factual changes, and one reporter, Joseph Berger, even tried to go through the right channels, using the “Talk” section
to request edits to inaccuracies on his page.
[RELATED: Get advanced brand journalism tips from Mark Ragan and Jim Ylisela.]
Even so, the edits were traced back to Times
What do you think, PR Daily
readers? Are the Times
’ edits harmless or is the Grey Lady overstepping?