writing an encyclopedia
Britannica is allowing users to edit and post entries to its online encyclopedia to combat wikipedia, but with a twist of the old-school integrated: user content must be reviewed by Britannica before it will be placed beside entries and posts can only be submitted by approved authors who register their real names and addresses.
Wikipedia is a controversial concept with complaints ranging from false information to cultural decline. But despite the criticism it is still in the top 10 sites used globally.
Perhaps it is also controversy that fuels the site—not controversy over whether the information is accurate or if anonymous authors are credible, but the inclusion of controversial information. James Loewen‘s book Lies My Teacher Told Me points to the whitewashing of (high-school) history as one of the key ingredients to making it boring. Pretending that everything was one-sided and heroes were only ever perfect ignores the drama of life. One of the brilliant sides to wikipedia is the ability to allow different cultures, viewpoints, and opinions to be expressed in the writing of history. As Danah Boyd mentioned in her speech at the 2008 Handheld Learning conference, teachers could choose to use wikipedia as a learning tool by accessing the history of entries and teaching students to evaluate the credibility of authors.
Britannica’s emulation of the wikipedia format is a big step, even with the restrictions. In fact, the restrictions directly address the major complaints heard about the wikipedia format, and by creating an alternative that emphasizes the expert while allowing for restricted user interaction Britannica may be bringing the idea of interactive technology to a new set of users.