Steve Rubel Advocating Wikipedia Spam?
Source Title:
Steve Rubel Advocating Wikipedia Spam?
Steve Rubel Advocating Wikipedia Spam?
Story Text:
First it was Tagvertising now it's Wikipedia Spam? C'mon Steve aside from being done to death, at the very least, it's a gray hat technique. You're a bright guy and you can do better than this, let's think outside of the can of spam, mmmkay...
First it was Tagvertising now it's Wikipedia Spam? C'mon Steve aside from being done to death, at the very least, it's a gray hat technique. You're a bright guy and you can do better than this, let's think outside of the can of spam, mmmkay...
Should PR professionals create Wikipedia entries for their clients? I agree with Joe Brockmeir at ZDNet. If we behave, stick to just the facts and let the community decide our fates (like we have a choice!) then we can play in the sandbox.
- Y! MyWeb
Doesn't surprise me in the
Doesn't surprise me in the least.
Surprised?
Don't everyone do that? I mean, open entries for their clients at Wikipedia? How on earth can that be spam? They have an open post form for everyone to use - take it down if you don't like what we put there!
>>Don't everyone do that?
I thought so too. But then I thought everyone did a lot of things. Perhaps if you only work for PR companies with big budgets you never really have to think outside the can?
I'd be cautious
- in the case of a weak ranking client that the wikipedia page would be outranking the official one.
Also, it's not entirely suitable for PR, as you will not really be able to control that text. Somebody could easily edit it to go against the interests of your customer. Then again, why not? Some say that bad PR is better than no PR, or even that bad PR is the best PR.
Hehe,
Take your head out of the bowl...and think outside the can ;p
Has anyone spotted a trend yet? I mean, of people spamming "dedicated" wiki pages that were originally set-up for their competitors?