Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Britannica fights back on trust

Encyclopedia Britannica, the once-uber knowledge harvester, is still trying to hold on despite the bulldozer growth of Wikipedia. Their claim has always been that their knowledge is approved by experts and can be trusted much more than what you read on Wikipedia. That's fine when there's equivalent depth of information from each source, but there just isn't, so Wikipedia gets more visitors and becomes the loyal destination for knowledge.

Today, Britannica announced they were going to compete with Wikipedia by opening the doors slightly to user-generated content, allowing only approved qualified people to contribute. According to the article, users can "list their qualifications" and they will be manually approved to contribute.

Wouldn't it be more scalable, consistent and trusted (and offer a hope of competing with Wikipedia) if users' qualifications were not just claimed by the user themselves, but part of an objective, automated system of credibility accreditation? Users would be accredited with knowing about certain subjects through their other contributions online. Know Between aims to offer such features.

1 comment:

peter kenneth said...

Good initiative!! Best of luck!
weegooseberry.com