Overview of ethical Wikipedia marketing
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•443 views
The Wikipedia marketing overview PPT is a pre-packaged presentation for educating your organization on ethical Wikipedia engagement strategies. The deck presents information on: - Why Wikipedia is important - The consequences of unethical participation - Legal compliance with the FTC's .com disclosures guide - Ethical engagement strategies
Overview of ethical Wikipedia marketing
- 2. Educated readers use Wikipedia Degree-holder Post-graduate Wikipedia Social networking Twitter * Based on percent of internet users from the Pew Internet and American Life Project
- 3. Organizations embarrassed in the media • • • • • • • • • • • • • PR agencies The Vatican The Mormon Church Amnesty International The FBI The Church of Scientology Exxon Microsoft Apple Coca-Cola Disney Wal-Mart The Guardian • • • • • • • • • • • • Nestle Pepsi Diebold The CIA Anheuser-Busch ChevronTexaco Dell Computers MySpace EA Games Fox News Sony British Petroleum
- 4. The FTC requires that we disclose our financial connection
- 5. Editors have not Prioritized our page * Based on Wikipedia’s own quality assessments
- 6. Finding middle-ground in company policy • Bias and misinformation run unchecked • Quality of Wikipedia pages remain low Hands-off Talk page strategies • Requires patience and expertise • Offers a safe and welcomed approach for improvements • Risk of vengeful editing from angry Wikipedians • Risk of media exposure Anonymous/Direct editing
- 7. Five approaches to Wikipedia 1. Hands-off 2. Monitoring & response 3. Public relations 4. Content marketing 5. Direct editing
Editor's Notes
- Talking points: Lets be proud of our work on Wikipedia
- Talking points: Wikipedia has more educated readers than Twitter and Facebook combined. Its articles are in the top ten of more than 95% of search results and it’s been ranked as the single most influential website on the planet. Yet we haven’t invested the same tactical and strategic resources as we’ve put into less influential channels.
- Talking points: It’s risky when not done right. Many organizations have been embarrassed in the media for their actions on Wikipedia
- Talking points: The Federal Trade Commission requires that we disclose our financial connection and not act as if we were another member of Wikipedia’s crowd-sourced editors.
- Talking Points: Based on an analysis of the Wikipedia community’s own assessments of 2,500+ brand pages, 85% are low in quality and 89% are of low or medium priority. We are the only ones likely to prioritize our page.
- Talking points: It’s irresponsible to ignore an influential website, but also risky to tamper with it in an ethical and legal grey area. There is a middle-ground of working with the site’s editors transparently.
- Monitoring & response = Pointing out errors when they occurPublic relations = being an expert resource and providing other assistance to the site’s editorsContent marketing = authoring content Wikipedia wants and offering it to the site’s editors transparentlyPaid editing = editing articles directly as if you are another member of Wikipedia’s crowd-sourced editors (not recommended)
- Talking points: Advocacy is broadly prohibited, so even if you disclose and use Talk pages, editors will see cherry-picking, omissions, and other edits that deviate from what a normal volunteer would to be a sign of impropriety. Organizations should avoid the potential appearance of advocacy.