When I discuss the accuracy and reliability of Wikipedia and other
web 2.0 sources with students, this often comes up and I'm never sure
how to respond. Here's an example:
It is known that Stephen Glass fabricated stories he published in
both the New Republic & Harpers. The New Republic published a letter
in their magazine retracting his story "Hack Heaven". But when you
access the original story in both Lexis/Nexis & ProQuest, there is no
note to alert the reader that the story has been retracted, or that
elements of the story were fabricated. And of course there have been
other journalism scandals over the years.
Why do publishers not alert the readers to acknowledged fabrications?
It's a database, it couldn't be too hard to flag articles that have
been retracted after publication, so why don't they do it? They must
have a reason, any ideas?
Pamela Burke
Librarian, Marlboro School
Marlboro, VT 05344
http://marlboroschool.net
SurRural Librarian
http://lib.surruralist.net/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please note: All LM_NET postings are protected by copyright law.
You can prevent most e-mail filters from deleting LM_NET postings
by adding LM_NET@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU to your e-mail address book.
To change your LM_NET status, e-mail to: listserv@listserv.syr.edu
In the message write EITHER: 1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL
3) SET LM_NET MAIL 4) SET LM_NET DIGEST * Allow for confirmation.
* LM_NET Help & Information: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/
* LM_NET Archive: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/archive/
* EL-Announce with LM_NET Select: http://lm-net.info/
* LM_NET Supporters: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/ven.html
* LM_NET Wiki: http://lmnet.wikispaces.com/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LM_NET
Mailing List Home