By
David Rothman
Wikipedia is almost like a wire service these days, with near-instant updates reflecting such events as election results. Excerpt from New York Times:
True to Wikipedia’s belief in transparency, while the editing is taking place there are public discussions over wording and what facts to include that can be read in all their tedious detail. Many pixels have been already been used to discuss whether Mr. Obama is technically the president-elect, even before the Electoral College has voted. You’ll see in the article that the consensus is that he is.
Imagine a time when instant updates might be routine in the world of nonfiction e-books. Positives? Yes. But will people be easily able to see older versions, just as they can use Wikipedia’s history feature?
Digg us. Slashdot us. Facebook us. Twitter us. Share the news.
November 10th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
No and thats a posible big big problem with ebooks, sometimes and thats especially for political non fictions the errors are the really importent part.
Your already seing it with newspapers and especially teletext system where stories can simply vanish without a trace and corrections are made to even old stories without telling anyone it’s happening.
Wikipedia is extremely honest and mothodic about their revisions(they have to be to gain credibility), that you probably cant expect from a major publisher who already have the needed credibility. Especially when it comes to softer non fiction(like autobiographies who is really a kind of fiction).