MGA logo

Conversations That Matter

JUNE
9
Is Wikipedia Part of your Online Communications Strategy?
by MGA

Author: Doug Magee

Most of the discussion about online communications by organizations focuses primarily on websites, blogs and social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. You seldom hear any discussion about the importance of Wikipedia. I know I didn't until I read an interesting blog post by Katie Paine, CEO and founder of KD Paine & Partners, LLC. Paine is an expert in measuring relationships and organizational accountability.


She summarized some fascinating research presented recently by Marcia Watson DiStaso (Penn State) and Marcus Messner (Virginia Commonwealth University) about how Wikipedia impacts reputation and public relations (The Corporate Image on Wikipedia in a Turbulent Economy). This study is based on the premise that Wikipedia goes beyond providing simple reference material to the formation of public opinion by providing extensive, timely information. This year's tracking study looked at the Wikipedia pages of major corporations including Chevron, GM and Wal-Mart.

wikipedia.png

DiStaso's and Watson's 2010 results indicate it has become even more critical over the last few years to pay attention to Wikipedia, primarily because of the site's influence on search engine results. The research shows Wikipedia continues to grow in importance and can dominate search results within Yahoo!, Google and MSN. The research even looked at how public opinion informs Wikipedia pages, both in the number of edits an organization's page receives and the number of unique users.

Another recently released study about Wikipedia came to a similar conclusion. In its analysis of the top 500 pages on Wikipedia, Lundquist, an online corporate communications consultancy in Italy said, "...To improve their online presence companies must engage with Wikipedia, not back away as is often assumed."

 Wikipedia may not be on your horizon yet. Or perhaps you view it primarily as reference material. But as its impact continues to grow, engaging with Wikipedia is preferable to doing nothing.





Please add a comment

Posted by Sarah Rasmussen on
This is interesting, Doug, thanks for sharing. I wasn't aware Wikipedia had become more important for having an online presence. Seems like it's a tool to keep an eye on, at the least!
Posted by Valerie Marshall on
Good information! I'm preparing our initial version of our marketing plan prior to meeting with your team. Since we plan to start out with a 100% on-line presence, this type of thought will be invaluable to us.
Posted by Jennifer on
I agree with your analysis, Doug, particularly for companies that do high-profile or controversial work. Many readers lack understanding of how Wikipedia tests the accuracy and completeness of information and don't know to check comments and counterviews to get a robust understanding of a topic. If you do work that arouses strong feeling or public interest, Wikipedia should be source you check regularly to monitor what is being said about you and ensure readers have access to multiple points of view.
Leave a Reply



(Your email will not be publicly displayed.)

Please type the letters and numbers shown in the image.Captcha Code



 
©2010 MGA Communications MGA Commuications facebook  MGA Communications twitter  MGA Communications LinkedIn   MGA Communications Flicker  MGA Communications You Tube  PROI  RSS About Us | Privacy Policy