Michael Gorman strikes again, in what has been appropriately coined, "Gormangate II". I am purposely posting this without any links, because I said in the LSW Meebo room that I would.
I will refrain from saying what I really feel about Michael Gorman (aka MG, or "He Who Should Not Be Named" as I referred to him in the chat room). Instead what I will comment on is the fact that this whole thing has been fishy from the beginning. Gorman used the Britannica blog to bash Web 2.0 and bloggers, I think this is wholly hypocritical. We all know from "Gormangate I" that Gorman is no fan of bloggers, or the "blog people" as he likes to call them. So why use the Britannica Blog as a forum? Britannica is simply trying to get attention. Of course the bloggers are giving it to them. I'm sure I'm contributing in some way, but I've decided to refuse the link back to the original blog post to not contribute entirely. Besides, I'm sure you can find it on Google, it's pretty easy by now. A Technorati search on his name brings up a whole mess of stuff.
They do say that negative attention is better than no attention at all, but I think that the same rules don't always apply when it comes to Web 2.0. I am more curious of the overall outcome of this than anything, because the aftermath of this will determine if Britannica's credibility survives. All the attention that Britannica is getting right now is manufactured and I believe that it will not last. People are linking and talking, mostly in disagreement. Britannica is not using their blog to gain any real loyal readers. Since we're talking about a corporate blog and not a personal one, the discussion that Gorman has started will most definitely reflect on the company as a whole. Britannica is running the risk of deterring people from their brand...although in library world, that may not make a difference, I guess I don't see a lot of libraries canceling their Encyclopedia Britannica subscriptions. I still think Britannica is running a huge risk (hence my fascination with the outcome). The risk that Britannica is taking is drawing attention to the fact that they think very poorly on "average people" as credible sources of information. These "average people", however, are Britannica's customers...the eventual users of their product. Instead of innovating and using Web 2.0 to their advantage, they're driving their users away by insulting them and continuing to create a product that is not easy to use. No wonder people prefer to go to Wikipedia for their information...it celebrates the fact that people do have a passion for learning and contributing their knowledge, and it is easy to use!
My gut tells me that this is just a warm-up round. It's no secret how Britannica feels about Wikipedia, I know the all out Britannica vs. Wikipedia blow out is coming soon. Or should I say Britannica vs. the World...it'll be messy and I certainly want a front row seat!
Technorati Tags: michael gorman, britannica, gormangate, wikipedia
Info Gal & Wiki Warrior
