“Using a matched sample of pairs of articles from Britannica and Wikipedia, we show that, overall, Wikipedia articles are more slanted towards Democrat than Britannica articles, as well as more biased. Slanted Wikipedia articles tend to become less biased than Britannica articles on the same topic as they become substantially revised, and the bias on a per word basis hardly differs between the sources… it is surprising because the average Wikipedia article receives over 1,900 revisions and that is still not enough for eliminating bias. So, Wikipedia falls short of its ideal, and it does so because it takes a lot of “eyeballs” to reduce considerable bias and slant… Our results imply two normative pieces of advice for such a community site: representing both sides of an issue typically takes a lot of contributions and considerable revision; and length by itself is usually insufficient to get a balanced view unless it also involved considerable revision.”
Interesting. Who is the internet.
No comments:
Post a Comment