Ethics in Wikipedia marketing - A guide to best practices
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
1 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing Table of contents Forward 2 What is Wikipedia 3 Wikipedia’s influence 4 The debate in a nutshell 5 What can we do ethically? 7 What is neutral? 8 Appropriate conduct 9 Things to avoid 10 Five approaches 11 Company policy 12 How to 13 Write content 14 Communicate with editors Selected links 16 About the author 17
2 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing Forward A panel of social media experts at an American Marketing Association event leaned over the table with a firm grip on their microphones, eager to pounce on the next question. Here it comes. “What is your company’s policy on Wikipedia?” An audible “thud, thud, thud” was heard as microphones were placed on the table. Some panelists leaned back and crossed their arms. Despite the awkward silence, an unspoken message was loud and clear, “I’m not answering that one.” Other marketers are more vocal. I came across an excited tweet from a Director of Marketing at a non-profit. Their intern had just created a Wikipedia page on them. Won’t you read it? By time I clicked on the link, the page had already been deleted. This isn’t unusual. An employee at one of the better-known PR agencies in the Raleigh-area confessed, “we weren’t even trying to be neutral,” regarding an article he posted that was quickly removed. On the opposite end of these events are frustrated volunteer Wikipedians that are both shocked at marketing’s lack of ethics and dulled because it has become so routine. Yet many marketers didn’t realize it was unethical to edit Wikipedia to promote their client or employer as if they were another crowd-sourced participant. My hope with this e-book is to help marketers change these experiences. That readers will participate on Wikipedia in a manner they can be proud of, rather than embarrassed by. And that readers will intellectually apply themselves to doing honest, high-quality work on the site. It’s about time we shine a bright light on what use to be a dark corner of marketing and public relations. Sincerely, David King, Ethical Wiki
3 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing What is Wikipedia Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia edited collaboratively by volunteers. It is hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit funded by donations. Unlike traditional paper encyclopedias that are limited by a set number of pages, Wikipedia can have an article on any subject that is covered extensively by credible, independent sources, such as newspapers, books, and academic articles. Wikipedia, which was founded in 2001, has become the largest general reference work on the Internet, with more than 4.3 million articles on the English-language Wikipedia alone. The site’s articles and policies are maintained by crowd-sourced volunteers, who donate their time to the site. Its objectivity, referred to as a Neutral Point of View (NPOV), is a significant element of the site’s goals and community culture. Contributors to the site are expected to abide by policies and guidelines that govern both its content and the conduct of its editors. Editors are expected to be civil and to produce content that is representative of authoritative, independent sources on the subject. There are also community norms that are not explicitly communicated in any policy. Although some studies show that Wikipedia’s most important articles are more accurate than traditional encyclopedias, it is often criticized for errors and other problems that arise from its crowd-sourced model. Some contributors use the site as a platform for their personal views, to attack companies they dislike, or to advertise products and services.
4 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing Wikipedia’s influence Wikipedia is one of Google’s top-recommended resources for learning about a company’s heritage, reputation, services, executives and operations. According to Alexa, it is the world’s sixth largest website, beating LinkedIn, Twitter and Wordpress. A 2011 report by the Pew Internet and American Life Project found that Wikipedia is used by 69 percent of college-educated adults in the US. In 2007 the CTO of marketing firm Virante published an analysis of 600 randomly selected Wikipedia pages. He found that those Wikipedia articles were in the top ten Google search results 96 percent of the time. Another study done in 2012 by SEO firm Intelligent Positioning found that, out of 1,000 searches, a Wikipedia article was in the number 1 position 56 percent of the time. Wikipedia has been ranked as the world’s most influential website. Ethical Wiki’s analysis of recent data from the Pew Internet and American Life Project shows that Wikipedia has more college educated readers than Twitter and Facebook combined. College educated readers Twitter Social networking Wikipedia This reflects a significant disparity between Wikipedia’s level of influence and the degree of expertise, thoughtfulness and resources that marketers devote to doing quality, ethical work on the site. In comparison, Twitter is less influential, but marketers spend more resources learning best practices and establishing company policy to ensure ethical best practices are followed.
5 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing The debate in a nutshell There’s been an extensive debate, especially over the last few years, about whether, how and to what extent marketers should be involved in Wikipedia articles about their client or employer. A survey of 1,284 public relations professionals conducted in 2012 showed that 60 percent of respondents believed the Wikipedia article on their employer contained factual errors. Later that year, a statistical analysis conducted by Ethical Wiki on 2,578 company articles found that only 10 percent of brand pages were identified as important by Wikipedia’s editorial community and 85 percent were low in quality. Most company articles on Wikipedia are unimportant to Wikipedia’s volunteer editorial community, but paramount to the companies they cover. Marketers are the most motivated to improve them, but are discouraged from doing so, since in most cases companies are unable to be neutral about themselves. The New York Times might have similar objections if marketers asked to write their own profile stories for the publication. There is also a long history of dubious and deceitful tactics deployed by corporations to slant Wikipedia in the organization’s favor, often leading to media exposure when bad actors are detected. Most marketers exposed for covertly manipulating Wikipedia edited articles without disclosing their corporate affiliation. This seems to show disregard for the Federal Trade Commission’s online disclosure rules, which require that marketers disclose their financial connection with the company online and avoid acting as though they are crowd- sourced participants. A court ruling in Germany upheld similar principles by finding a CEO guilty of covert advertising for using Wikipedia to promote his products. However, even organizations engaging in the most egregious possible behavior on Wikipedia are often unaware their behavior was inappropriate.
6 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing Writing your company's own Wikipedia article has sometimes been described as "astroturfing". The phrase, which refers to fake grass, describes efforts that create the appearance of being crowd-sourced or grass-roots, without disclosing a hidden corporate sponsor. This is because readers presume Wikipedia’s content is crowd-sourced, though it is sometimes a blatant (or more subtle) advertisement, which can be misleading to readers. A “Bright Line” rule advocated by Jimmy Wales has gained some traction as an ethical approach to marketing participation on the site. The rule is that marketers never directly edit Wikipedia articles about their client or employer, but instead make suggestions or draft content and leave editorial decisions up to disinterested volunteers. When followed, the Bright Line rule prevents blatant censorship and advertising on Wikipedia, but it hasn’t prevented companies that follow it from experiencing controversy, nor has it completely eliminated ethical ambiguity. For example, it’s confusing to think about how the FTC’s disclosure laws would apply to readers that presume Wikipedia’s content is crowd-sourced, when it is actually marketing-produced and placed on the page by proxy. Many Wikipedians will approve a marketer’s content despite overt biases or feel betrayed later when they realize negative information was missing or marginalized. Is it ethical to obtain a biased article on Wikipedia through persuasive arguments pitched to naïve, amateur volunteers on a site that prohibits advocacy? It’s a question with no clear answer. It will always be controversial to sway Wikipedia’s neutrality, even if done transparently and even if done in a manner technically compliant with Wikipedia’s rules.
7 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing What can we do ethically? There is a simple maxim that can serve as a marketer’s ethical compass on Wikipedia: Make the same contributions a productive, crowd-sourced volunteer would make. Marketers should be nearly indistinguishable from a crowd-sourced Wikipedian in the content they produce, behavior and priorities, except that they disclose a conflict of interest, act cautiously and defer to disinterested editors to avoid the appearance of impropriety. It is difficult and risky for corporations to attempt to maintain a Wikipedia article that is out-of-step with Wikipedia’s standards. Therefor the organization should establish an objective not to control, influence or align Wikipedia’s content with corporate branding, but to ensure the article is up to Wikipedia’s standards. The company’s contributions to Wikipedia should be honest and defendable. Regardless of what process is used, if a marketer influences Wikipedia to stray from neutral, it is permanently documented in Wikipedia’s editing records. The organization may be held accountable for their contributions even months or years later. Impeccable contributions are the best way to protect the article’s integrity long-term and maintain productive relationships on Wikipedia. In the best of cases, companies will set even higher standards for quality and neutrality than is the norm among crowd-sourced participants, in order to make sure their contributions are beyond reproach.
8 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing What is neutral? This is a tricky subject, since even veteran Wikipedians often have disagreements about what is neutral for a specific article or topic. A neutral Wikipedia article not only carries a neutral tone, but is representative of the available literature on the subject. Some “neutral” Wikipedia articles may have a negative leaning Wikipedians expect and others positive, depending on the available marketers not to just “write citations. neutrally” but to create genuinely balanced accounts of the subject. This is important to keep in mind for marketers that may be tempted to author a History section that omits major controversies or a Reception section that only summarizes positive product reviews. It may be considered dubious to “hide” information or contribute in an obviously one-sided way. This puts marketers in an uncomfortable position, because inevitably some sources about the company will include points-of-view the organization doesn’t agree with and information that does not serve its best interest. That’s the conflict of interest aspect. You’re expected to include this information fairly the same way a crowd-sourced participant would. If that doesn’t make you or other stakeholders uncomfortable – if there is no tension involved – you may be doing something wrong. One key to success is for the organization to have an advocate for ethics involved in the process; someone who will persuade stakeholders, push for honesty and advocate for a fair contribution. The organization will be faced with the temptation to stretch things, omit information, cherry-pick what sources they use and other slanting and someone needs to help the organization resist temptation. Fight for your organization’s long-term integrity as an honest contributor that Wikipedians can trust. It will serve you in the long- run.
9 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing Appropriate conduct At its best, Wikipedia marketing should give Wikipedia’s editors an experience similar to working with fellow volunteers. The experience should feel organic, incremental, collaborative and based on mutual trust and good-faith efforts to improve Wikipedia. The only difference between the marketer and a regular crowd-sourced editor should be that Marketers are expected to be cautious to avoid the marketer will disclose their conflict of any signs of impropriety, interest, avoid editing the page directly and as opposed to advocate they operate at a trust deficit compared to for their client’s point-of- volunteers – at least until that trust is earned. view Advocacy is prohibited on Wikipedia and being pushy or aggressive is almost always counter-productive. Also, tactics like spin, omissions and slanting are risky if detected. The ethical marketer’s goal is to contribute in a similar manner as any volunteer contributor would, while being cautious to avoid any sign of impropriety. This puts marketers, who are traditionally aggressive about getting results, into a counter-intuitive role. The idea isn’t to have your arguments heard or to persuade editors to see things from the client’s point-of-view, but to ask for help in getting perspective and input from disinterested editors in order to make sure you’re being neutral. Marketers should exercise good judgment for each situation. Tactics like micromanaging the exact text or wording of the article, dominating the discussion, or pouncing on editors that make mediocre, good-faith edits to the page may offer small, short-term gains in content outcomes, at the significant expense of long-term relationships and comfort levels with Wikipedians. Consider asking other editors to get more heavily involved in controversial areas where the company is unlikely to be neutral.
10 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing Things to avoid There is no catch-all advice in upholding the various principles and concepts introduced in this e-book. They must be applied intellectually to the circumstance. However, there are some very common mistakes marketers make on Wikipedia, which we’ll cover here in a check-list format. Readers should be advised that these are general guidelines and there may be exceptions that apply to individual circumstances. ! Avoid promotional sections like Awards, Philanthropy, Recognition or Corporate Social Responsibility. ! Avoid creating separate articles on the company and its products if they can be consolidated ! Avoid creating an excessively detailed article in general. ! Avoid bullets in most cases, especially if they are long lists of individual products, partners, locations or executives. ! Avoid articles that are focused on products or executives rather than the organization’s heritage. ! Avoid using citations that merely repeat what the company told them, such as re-written press releases. ! Avoid using too many primary sources, such as the company website. ! Avoid using an overly official tone or writing style, both in the article’s content and in discussions with editors.
11 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing Five approaches to Wikipedia marketing Often the assumption is that the only role for marketers on Wikipedia is to write the article, but this is not true. We’ve divided Wikipedia marketing into five different approaches that may each be valid in different circumstances. A hands-off policy is preferred for organizations that: • do not meet Wikipedia’s requirements for an article • have a negative reputation not represented on the page • are extremely risk-adverse or do not want to invest resources Monitoring and response is a good approach for those that • are primarily interested in responding to matters of factual accuracy • are reasonably happy with the article’s current state Public relations support of volunteer editors is desirable if: • there are highly engaged editors that will use resources the company provides, such as images, citations and expertise • the subject-matter is too sensitive for the company to author it Content marketing by offering content for consideration is preferred when: • the company has access to expertise and will devote the substantial time-resources required • the only practical way to obtain a fair article is to author it • the company wants predictable, consistent results Direct editing is an option for companies that: • do not feel the legal and/or ethical implications are important or significant • are making clerical edits like improving grammar or citation formatting
12 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing Company policy Many large companies have social media policies in place intended to ensure compliance with the FTC’s astroturfing regulations and avoid any misunderstandings. For example, say an administrative assistant, janitor, or executive have personal Twitter handles and often tweet about their employer’s latest product announcements. Company policy may suggest that they To avoid misunderstandings, disclose that they work for the company on create disclosure policies for their Twitter profile. This is to avoid the employees similar to what may appearance of promoting the company already be in place for Twitter. without disclosing a financial connection as required by the FTC. The lack of similar corporate policies for Wikipedia has become apparent in a number of media controversies. In many cases companies are accused of manipulating Wikipedia entries, when it is actually the edits of an individual at the company acting out of their own volition. Many companies overlook Wikipedia in educating employees about online disclosure. Pre-existing policies for other digital channels may be easily adapted for Wikipedia and lumped into the same process for educating staff. In general, employees should be asked to disclose their employment at the company if they edit articles related to it on their free time. In some cases, companies may simply ask employees not to edit the company’s article(s) at all. This is a grey area in Wikipedia’s own rules and it is not unusual for an employee with no connection to marketing to get in trouble on Wikipedia for conflict of interest, even if they were participating on a volunteer basis.
13 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing How to This section is dedicated to tactical, how-to instructions, for marketers that have never edited Wikipedia before and need help with coding, the user interface and other details. How to write content Technically speaking, Wikipedia’s content policies are vast, complicated, nuanced and require extensive experience to understand. However, the basic tenants of writing for Wikipedia are actually quite simple. Content should be written neutrally, it should be cited to credible, independent sources we can trust, and it should be representative of the total body of literature available on the subject. We won’t cover Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines extensively here, especially because Wikipedia has no firm rules and is guided largely by good judgment from experienced editors. However, marketers that want to author content about their client or employer should consider getting experience editing other articles first. There is some wiki-code you should familiarize yourself with: • At the end of each sentence, add the code: . In between the two ref tags, add a citation for where the content comes from, such as a news article. Consider putting citations into coded templates, so they are easier to read. • The Infobox template for company pages is a good way to add basic information like number of employees, the company website and the date the organization was founded. • The title of sections of the article should be between two equal signs “==” while sub-sections have three “===”
14 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing • If you mention a topic that has its own Wikipedia article, you may want to link to its Wikipedia artticle using double brackets. “[[Foundry]]” for example would like to the article on foundries. • Add “{{reflist}}” under a “==References==” section near the bottom of the article. This will publish a list of all the citations used in the article. How to Communicate with editors Click here to register an account on Wikipedia. Among other things, this will create a personal message board where other editors can contact you. You should also login with your new account before posting comments or making edits. At the top of each Wikipedia article is a bar with several tabs. Wikipedia is openly editable, meaning anyone can click the “Edit” button and change the article’s contents at any time, but as a marketer, you’ll be relying heavily on the Talk tab. Once you click on “Talk” the toolbar will change slightly. Consider skimming the discussion so far to get a sense of the article’s history, what editors are talking about and which users are most active on the page. To start a new discussion, click “New Section” in the toolbar. Write out your comments and sign it by adding four tildes “~~~~”.
15 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing If you are requesting a factual correction, you may consider adding “{{request edit}}” above your comment. This adds a template and places the request in a queue for consideration. Click the “Save Page” button at the bottom of the screen to post your comment, which will show up on a feed for editors who have the article on their watchlist. In the upper right hand corner of the screen is another set of options. The Talk button is where other editors will leave messages for you and the number (a zero in the screenshot) will show notifications where editors have mentioned you or left a message for you. Other editors that participated on the Talk page of the article will also have their comments signed. The signature has a link to their personal Talk page where you can reach out to them directly. Another way to reach out to editors is to find editors that have been active on the page by clicking on View History and identifying active participants. Then go to their Talk pages and leave them a message directly. You can also use Noticeboards to post messages that are not directed at a specific editor, but are advertised broadly for input. A key one is the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard, which is a good place to ask for help. Noticeboards work just like other Talk pages. You can click “New section” to start a new post. Wikipedia has additional contact instructions on the Contact us – article subjects page, including an email info-en-q@wikimedia.org.
16 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing Selected links • LinkedIn Group: Ethical Wikipedia Marketing & PR • Best Practices Guidance for Public Relations Professionals - Chartered Institute of Public Relations • Wikipedia Overview PPT - Ethical Wiki • Q&A on Public Relations and Wikipedia – Wikipedia SignPost • Conflict of Interest Guideline - Wikipedia • Paid advocacy FAQ - Jimmy Wales • .com Disclosures Guide - Federal Trade Commission • Advice for PR agencies - PR Squared/Ethical Wiki • Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines - Wikipedia
17 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing About the author David King is a Wikipedia consultant and the founder of Ethical Wiki. He has created more than 10 percent of Wikipedia’s most highly ranked articles about companies. King has made more than 20,000 edits to Wikipedia over the last five years. He is a regular speaker and educator on the importance of Wikipedia and of ethics in corporate participation. In his role at Ethical Wiki, he helps companies offer content, request corrections and discuss controversies with Wikipedia’s editors, while strictly adhering to the firm’s Statement of Ethics.
You can also read