My favourite anti-Wikipedia sophist, the Register’s Andrew Orlowsky, is at it again in an article entitled Who owns your Wikipedia bio?.
He reminds me of Ali-G, in that its the reaction of his victims, more than the nonsense he speaks, that provides the humour. A notable example for Americans was when Ali G (actually it was the character Barat) got American Republican candidate James S. Broadwater to state that Jews would go to Hell if they did not follow the Christian religion. Quite humorous really, if not for the fact that he believed it, and is in with a chance of being elected to the US Congress, joining the growing number of terrifyingly similar lawmakers already running that country. (Anyone remember Robert Heinlein’s Interregnum, in which a backwoods revivalist becomes dictator of the United States).
Before I digress too far, however, I have my doubts whether Orlowsky is aware of what he does. Certainly, unlike Ali-G, mainstream sources seem to lend a little too much authority to his pieces, as ITWeb did by using the Register article as a source for a neutral piece on Wikipedia tightening its rules.
Orlowsky is not a popular guy, as a quick Google of his name shows. He gets described as the noted Register troll by Tom Coates, there’s Thomas Hawks’ Andrew Orlowski, Sloppy Journalist or Bold Faced Liar?, some rants on InfoAnarchy, and finally Andrew Orlowski is a hack, by Ed Bott, and that’s all on the first Google page.
Looking at the pieces he’s written about Wikipedia, (see the Related articles at the bottom), it’s not surprising that he’s taken advantage of the recent John Seigenthaler controversy on Wikipedia – and yes, I’m happy to link to the Wikipedia version of the article :).
On a quiet news day, a piece such as that by Orlowski can get the veins bulging and boost the readership, but its disappointing that it does. Wikipedia is a fantastic innovation, It works, self-evidently. Pointing out flaws in a snide tone, tossing in asides that the whole thing is just a role-playing game, or a multi-user graffiti board, cannot take away from the success of the project to date. But it discourages those on the outskirts, who haven’t yet got it (yes, I’m using that term consciously too), and makes it seem cool to trash the idea. And that’s their loss.