Flutterby™! : Philip Roth and Wikipedia

Next unread comment / Catchup all unread comments User Account Info | Logout | XML/Pilot/etc versions | Long version (with comments) | Weblog archives | Site Map | | Browse Topics

Philip Roth and Wikipedia

2012-09-16 15:23:08.332695+02 by Dan Lyke 0 comments

Philip Roth wrote "an open letter to Wikipedia" in The New Yorker complaining about his problems in trying to change an entry in the Wikipedia article on The Human Stain.

Philip Roth and Wikipedia fact-checks Mr. Roth's article:

Third: people should perhaps start having a debate about the way authors are treated in “proper” sources. The New Yorker, the Guardian, ABC News and the Los Angeles Times – all respected bodies. And all, without being able and/or willing to do their own research, happily published or republished Roth’s assertions. We rely on these organisations for reporting what our politicians do, what our armed forces do, how entities with the power of life and death over humanity are accountable to the people. And they happily gulp down the glorified press releases of anyone who offers to let them touch his Pulitzer.

[ related topics: Books Invention and Design Current Events Archival ]

comments in ascending chronological order (reverse):

Comment policy

We will not edit your comments. However, we may delete your comments, or cause them to be hidden behind another link, if we feel they detract from the conversation. Commercial plugs are fine, if they are relevant to the conversation, and if you don't try to pretend to be a consumer. Annoying endorsements will be deleted if you're lucky, if you're not a whole bunch of people smarter and more articulate than you will ridicule you, and we will leave such ridicule in place.


Flutterby™ is a trademark claimed by

Dan Lyke
for the web publications at www.flutterby.com and www.flutterby.net.