Photo: Flickr user lifeontheedge

Monday, March 05, 2007

The NYTimes recap says that the Essjay story 'shows how the transparency of the Wikipedia process...allows readers to react to suspected fraud. ... By Saturday, the prevailing view was summarized in subject lines like Essjay Must Resign, and notes calling Mr. Jordan’s actions “plain and simple fraud.”' (Bonus: The fairest, pithiest conclusion yet. Someone had to do it.)

Andrew Lih says that when all is said and done, maybe the New Yorker should have checked their facts better (being, you know, the New Yorker).

No comments: