News by Topic
- Search Marketing
- Email Marketing
- Loyalty Marketing
- Mobile Marketing
- Social Marketing
- Viral Marketing
- Trends & Ideas
- Internet Marketing 101
60% of Wikipedia articles about companies contain factual errors
Do you know if your company's Wikipedia entry is factually correct? According to new research from the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) six out of ten Wikipedia articles about businesses contain errors.
It might be worth checking out the Wikipedia article about your company. Research by Marcia W. DiStaso, Ph.D., co-chair of PRSA's National Research Committee and an assistant professor of public relations at Penn State University in State College, found that 60% of articles about specific companies contained factual errors or, in some cases, outright sabotage.
"The editing of Wikipedia by public relations and corporate communications professionals is a serious issue and one that needs to be addressed by everyone," said DiStaso. "The status quo can't continue. A high amount of factual errors doesn't work for anyone, especially the public, which relies on Wikipedia for accurate, balanced information."
However, as the research reveals, getting any amendments done can be quite a task. Of the 1,284 respondents to the PRSA's survey who contacted Wikipedia to remedy errors a quarter (24%) never heard back, 40% waited several days before getting a response and 12% were left waiting for weeks.
The problem, it seems, is a lack of understanding between public relations professionals and Wikipedia editors regarding the proper way to put forward corrections. In fact, public relations professionals appear to have scant knowledge of Wikipedia's editing rules.
"It does not surprise me that so many Wikipedia entries contain factual errors," said DiStaso. "What is surprising, however, is that 25% of survey respondents indicated they are not familiar with the Wikipedia articles for their company or clients. At some point most, if not all, companies will determine they need to change something in their Wikipedia entries. Without clear, consistent rules from Wikipedia regarding how factual corrections can be made this will be a very difficult learning process for public relations professionals."
- Study: Mobile key for online grocery buys
- Job Seekers: How to get the next job
- Top 3 tips to improve travel loyalty programs
- New Realeyes' research links emotional response to sales impact
- Coalition for Better Ads releases new guidance to curb consumer annoyance with ads
- Instagram's focus on business tools attracts SMB advertisers
- Traditional external agency model failing to meet marketers' needs
- Few marketers intend to invest in marketing technology in 2017
Featured White Papers
- Learn Why 83% of Advertisers Are Reporting Superior Outcomes With People-Based Ads
Traditional digital display advertising doesn't work. The information in this report is based on an online survey of 350 senior...
- 2016 Email Marketing Metrics Benchmark Study
To build a world-class marketing program, it's crucial to compare yourself to the best performers - but competitor data can...
- 10 Ways to Use Customer Lifetime Value to Reinvent Your Marketing Strategy
CLV insights can help you to attract high-margin customers, target clusters of customers with untapped value, and retain high-value customers...
- 16 Innovative Loyalty Programs of 2016
Engaging customers in a loyalty program is no easy feat. Read how 16 brands grabbed headlines in 2016 by launching...