|
|
|
|
|
|
by spinchange
4848 days ago
|
|
|
Regrettably, I think a lot of journalists are also spoon-fed PR and don't dig deeper or ask more questions. Just last week I saw two stories, one on MIT Technology Review [0] and another on Fast Company [1] about Facebook's up-and-coming "Entity Graph." Ostensibly aimed at bolstering their search and informational relevance, neither article reported that many of these pages are scraped/imported content from Wikipedia and have been there since 2010, then called "Community Pages." Fast Company goes as far as to compare Facebook's efforts in this area to Wikipedia's, but doesn't mention that millions of pages are taken directly from Wikipedia. I did some digging on my own and found that at the time this was started, Wikipedia's director of business development was quoted as saying this was a positive development and viewed favorably by the foundation [2], but neither piece of reporting mentions anything about it. Both position Facebook's effort as being grassroots and not something seeded/bootstrapped off of Commons and a not-for-profit site. [0] http://www.technologyreview.com/news/511591/facebook-nudges-... [1] http://www.fastcompany.com/3006389/where-are-they-now/entity... [2] http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/21721 |
|
|