2 ms·
Would people contribute as much if the site was supported by advertising? Would people use and trust the content as much if the site was supported by advertisi
by lwhi 16y ago
Would people contribute as much if the site was supported by advertising?
Would people use and trust the content as much if the site was supported by advertising?
I think the answer to both of these questions is 'no'.
When I talk about the Wikipedia brand losing power, this is what I'm thinking about.
- notahacker 16y agoAs I pointed out, exactly the same content with exactly the same contributors is syndicated by profit-making entities like Answers.com anyway. There's certainly no shortage of content on Jimmy Wales' own openly-commercial and frequently-interfering Wikia (arguably Wikia making it's reputation off Wikipedia association is a far bigger conflict of any interest than any conceivable advertiser could manage...) I'm sure most people use Wikipedia because they've heard of the site and/or it's almost invariably within the top three Google results of a search on any given topic and usually the most informative page. Maybe lack of ads helps maintain the illusion that it's "more neutral" than other user moderated communities, but I'm still not convinced that's an illusion worth paying for.
- lwhi 16y agoWell, I disagree. The fact other commercial sites syndicate Wikipedia's content is beside the point. I believe Wikipedia _is_ more neutral than other user moderated communities; it's not perfect, but it serves a very good purpose. I think it's worth paying for, which is why I donated.