Community Page
- www.mathewingram.com/work Jump to website »
-
Subscribe -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
-
Recent Comments
- Hi Mathew, I'm glad you finally got an iPhone. I remember you mentioning you wanted one but had a Blackberry for work. I'm a big fan of the Panorama application... and Bejeweled 2.
- I found your blog while I'm surfing the net. It's an interesting blog, I've added your blog to my favorites.
- I found your blog while I'm surfing the net. It's an interesting blog, I've added your blog to my favorites.
- It's a real shame that an area that could revolutionise radio as we know it (FM/AM) is being squashed like this. Internet radio allows very niche services to operate and be listened to by the...
- What a useful post here. Very informative for me..TQ friends... Cheers, <a href="http://sain-web.com" rel="nofollow">Buat Duit Dengan Blog</a>
Jump to original thread »
Props to Michael Geist for holding the government’s feet to the fire for editing the Industry Minister’s Wikipedia entry. Not just because it’s unseemly for agents of the current administration (or any administration, for that matter) to be editing Wikipedia
... Continue reading »
1 年 ago
"It is rumoured that Prentice has been responsible for developing new Canadian Intellectual Property laws akin to the DMCA in the United States, partly due to pressure from US-based advocacy groups [1]. While he had promised to "put consumers first", the commentators have suggested that the draft legislation seems to cater strictly to industrial groups and Prentice has now suggested consumer interests may not be heard for years. [2] Indeed, Prentice has refused to talk to a group of protesters who went to his office to express their concern.[3] stating "When (Canadian Heritage Minister Josee) Verner and I have reached a consensus and we're satisfied, we will introduce a bill." [4]"
In each source cited in this statement Geist is the predominant quoted person by the reporter in the article or it is directly citing his blog. It would not pass a test of being balanced, unless they started quoting from the Conservative parties website to get another side of the discussion. That said this is a stupid way of fixing the issue, they should have caused a stir in the discussion for the page to express the unhappiness with the bias.
The current version is much more balanced so to some extent the system works.
1 年 ago
original edits likely didn't meet Wikipedia's test of neutrality, but
to add even more unbalanced edits in the opposite direction is hardly
the right response. In other words, lame.
1 年 ago
Comment by Will Harper, Managing Editor, SF Weekly on Feb 26th, 2008, 13:55 pm