Ethics in Wikipedia marketing A guide to best practices
1 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
Table of contents
Forward
2
What is Wikipedia
3
Wikipedia’s influence
4
The debate in a nutshell
5
What can we do ethically?
7
What is neutral?
8
Appropriate conduct
9
Things to avoid
10
Five approaches
11
Company policy
12
How to
Write content
Communicate with editors
13
14
Selected links
16
About the author
17
2 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
Forward
A panel of social media experts at an American Marketing
Association event leaned over the table with a firm grip on their
microphones, eager to pounce on the next question. Here it comes.
“What is your company’s policy on Wikipedia?”
An audible “thud, thud, thud” was heard as microphones were placed
on the table. Some panelists leaned back and crossed their arms.
Despite the awkward silence, an unspoken message was loud and
clear, “I’m not answering that one.”
Other marketers are more vocal. I came across an excited tweet from a
Director of Marketing at a non-profit. Their intern had just created a
Wikipedia page on them. Won’t you read it? By time I clicked on the
link, the page had already been deleted.
This isn’t unusual. An employee at one of the better-known PR
agencies in the Raleigh-area confessed, “we weren’t even trying to be
neutral,” regarding an article he posted that was quickly removed.
On the opposite end of these events are frustrated volunteer
Wikipedians that are both shocked at marketing’s lack of ethics and
dulled because it has become so routine. Yet many marketers didn’t
realize it was unethical to edit Wikipedia to promote their client or
employer as if they were another crowd-sourced participant.
My hope with this e-book is to help marketers change these
experiences. That readers will participate on Wikipedia in a manner
they can be proud of, rather than embarrassed by. And that readers
will intellectually apply themselves to doing honest, high-quality
work on the site.
It’s about time we shine a bright light on what use to be a dark corner
of marketing and public relations.
Sincerely,
David King, Ethical Wiki
3 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
What is Wikipedia
Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia edited collaboratively by
volunteers. It is hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit
funded by donations.
Unlike traditional paper encyclopedias that are limited by a set
number of pages, Wikipedia can have an article on any subject that is
covered extensively by credible, independent sources, such as
newspapers, books, and academic articles.
Wikipedia, which was founded in 2001, has become the largest
general reference work on the Internet, with more than 4.3 million
articles on the English-language Wikipedia alone.
The site’s articles and policies are maintained by crowd-sourced
volunteers, who donate their time to the site. Its objectivity, referred to
as a Neutral Point of View (NPOV), is a significant element of the
site’s goals and community culture.
Contributors to the site are expected to abide by policies and
guidelines that govern both its content and the conduct of its editors.
Editors are expected to be civil and to produce content that is
representative of authoritative, independent sources on the subject.
There are also community norms that are not explicitly communicated
in any policy.
Although some studies show that Wikipedia’s
most important articles are more accurate than
traditional encyclopedias, it is often criticized for
errors and other problems that arise from its
crowd-sourced model. Some contributors use the
site as a platform for their personal views, to
attack companies they dislike, or to advertise
products and services.
4 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
Wikipedia’s influence
Wikipedia is one of Google’s top-recommended resources for learning
about a company’s heritage, reputation, services, executives and
operations. According to Alexa, it is the world’s sixth largest website,
beating LinkedIn, Twitter and Wordpress. A 2011 report by the Pew
Internet and American Life Project found that Wikipedia is used by 69
percent of college-educated adults in the US.
In 2007 the CTO of marketing firm Virante published an analysis of
600 randomly selected Wikipedia pages. He found that those
Wikipedia articles were in the top ten Google search results 96
percent of the time. Another study done in 2012 by SEO firm
Intelligent Positioning found that, out of 1,000 searches, a Wikipedia
article was in the number 1 position 56 percent of the time.
Wikipedia has been ranked as the world’s most influential website.
Ethical Wiki’s analysis of recent data from the Pew Internet and
American Life Project shows that Wikipedia has more college
educated readers than Twitter and Facebook combined.
College educated readers
Twitter Social networking Wikipedia This reflects a significant disparity between Wikipedia’s level of
influence and the degree of expertise, thoughtfulness and resources
that marketers devote to doing quality, ethical work on the site. In
comparison, Twitter is less influential, but marketers spend more
resources learning best practices and establishing company policy to
ensure ethical best practices are followed.
5 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
The debate in a nutshell
There’s been an extensive debate, especially over the last few years,
about whether, how and to what extent marketers should be involved
in Wikipedia articles about their client or employer.
A survey of 1,284 public relations professionals conducted in 2012
showed that 60 percent of respondents believed the Wikipedia article
on their employer contained factual errors. Later that year, a statistical
analysis conducted by Ethical Wiki on 2,578 company articles found
that only 10 percent of brand pages were identified as important by
Wikipedia’s editorial community and 85 percent were low in quality.
Most company articles on Wikipedia are unimportant to Wikipedia’s
volunteer editorial community, but paramount to the companies they
cover. Marketers are the most motivated to improve them, but are
discouraged from doing so, since in most cases companies are unable
to be neutral about themselves. The New York Times might have
similar objections if marketers asked to write their own profile stories
for the publication.
There is also a long history of dubious and deceitful tactics deployed
by corporations to slant Wikipedia in the organization’s favor, often
leading to media exposure when bad actors are detected.
Most marketers exposed for covertly manipulating Wikipedia edited
articles without disclosing their corporate affiliation. This seems to
show disregard for the Federal Trade Commission’s online disclosure
rules, which require that marketers disclose their financial connection
with the company online and avoid acting as though they are crowdsourced participants. A court ruling in Germany upheld similar
principles by finding a CEO guilty of covert advertising for using
Wikipedia to promote his products.
However, even organizations engaging in the most egregious possible
behavior on Wikipedia are often unaware their behavior was
inappropriate.
6 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
Writing your company's own Wikipedia article has sometimes been described as
"astroturfing". The phrase, which refers to fake grass, describes efforts that create the
appearance of being crowd-sourced or grass-roots, without disclosing a hidden corporate
sponsor. This is because readers presume Wikipedia’s content is crowd-sourced, though
it is sometimes a blatant (or more subtle) advertisement, which can be misleading to
readers.
A “Bright Line” rule advocated by Jimmy Wales has gained some
traction as an ethical approach to marketing participation on the site.
The rule is that marketers never directly edit Wikipedia articles about
their client or employer, but instead make suggestions or draft content
and leave editorial decisions up to disinterested volunteers.
When followed, the Bright Line rule prevents blatant censorship and
advertising on Wikipedia, but it hasn’t prevented companies that
follow it from experiencing controversy, nor has it completely
eliminated ethical ambiguity.
For example, it’s confusing to think about how the FTC’s disclosure
laws would apply to readers that presume Wikipedia’s content is
crowd-sourced, when it is actually marketing-produced and placed on
the page by proxy. Many Wikipedians will approve a marketer’s
content despite overt biases or feel betrayed later when they realize
negative information was missing or marginalized.
Is it ethical to obtain a biased article on Wikipedia through persuasive
arguments pitched to naïve, amateur volunteers on a site that prohibits
advocacy? It’s a question with no clear answer.
It will always be controversial to sway Wikipedia’s neutrality, even if
done transparently and even if done in a manner technically compliant
with Wikipedia’s rules.
7 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
What can we do ethically?
There is a simple maxim that can serve as a marketer’s ethical
compass on Wikipedia:
Make the same contributions a productive, crowd-sourced
volunteer would make.
Marketers should be nearly indistinguishable from a crowd-sourced
Wikipedian in the content they produce, behavior and priorities,
except that they disclose a conflict of interest, act cautiously and defer
to disinterested editors to avoid the appearance of impropriety.
It is difficult and risky for corporations to attempt to maintain a
Wikipedia article that is out-of-step with Wikipedia’s standards.
Therefor the organization should establish an objective not to control,
influence or align Wikipedia’s content with corporate branding, but to
ensure the article is up to Wikipedia’s standards.
The company’s contributions to Wikipedia should be honest and
defendable. Regardless of what process is used, if a marketer
influences Wikipedia to stray from neutral, it is permanently
documented in Wikipedia’s editing records. The organization may be
held accountable for their contributions even months or years later.
Impeccable contributions are the best way to protect the article’s
integrity long-term and maintain productive relationships on
Wikipedia.
In the best of cases, companies will set even higher standards for
quality and neutrality than is the norm among crowd-sourced
participants, in order to make sure their contributions are beyond
reproach.
8 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
What is neutral?
This is a tricky subject, since even veteran
Wikipedians often have disagreements about
what is neutral for a specific article or topic. A
neutral Wikipedia article not only carries a
neutral tone, but is representative of the available
literature on the subject. Some “neutral”
Wikipedia articles may have a negative leaning
and others positive, depending on the available
citations.
Wikipedians expect
marketers not to just “write
neutrally” but to create
genuinely balanced
accounts of the subject.
This is important to keep in mind for marketers
that may be tempted to author a History section that omits major
controversies or a Reception section that only summarizes positive
product reviews. It may be considered dubious to “hide” information
or contribute in an obviously one-sided way.
This puts marketers in an uncomfortable position, because inevitably
some sources about the company will include points-of-view the
organization doesn’t agree with and information that does not serve its
best interest. That’s the conflict of interest aspect. You’re expected to
include this information fairly the same way a crowd-sourced
participant would. If that doesn’t make you or other stakeholders
uncomfortable – if there is no tension involved – you may be doing
something wrong.
One key to success is for the organization to have an advocate for
ethics involved in the process; someone who will persuade
stakeholders, push for honesty and advocate for a fair contribution.
The organization will be faced with the temptation to stretch things,
omit information, cherry-pick what sources they use and other
slanting and someone needs to help the organization resist temptation.
Fight for your organization’s long-term integrity as an honest
contributor that Wikipedians can trust. It will serve you in the longrun.
9 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
Appropriate conduct
At its best, Wikipedia marketing should give
Wikipedia’s editors an experience similar to
working with fellow volunteers. The
experience should feel organic, incremental,
collaborative and based on mutual trust and
good-faith efforts to improve Wikipedia.
The only difference between the marketer and
a regular crowd-sourced editor should be that
the marketer will disclose their conflict of
interest, avoid editing the page directly and
they operate at a trust deficit compared to
volunteers – at least until that trust is earned.
Marketers are expected
to be cautious to avoid
any signs of impropriety,
as opposed to advocate
for their client’s point-ofview
Advocacy is prohibited on Wikipedia and being pushy or aggressive is
almost always counter-productive. Also, tactics like spin, omissions
and slanting are risky if detected. The ethical marketer’s goal is to
contribute in a similar manner as any volunteer contributor would,
while being cautious to avoid any sign of impropriety.
This puts marketers, who are traditionally aggressive about getting
results, into a counter-intuitive role. The idea isn’t to have your
arguments heard or to persuade editors to see things from the client’s
point-of-view, but to ask for help in getting perspective and input
from disinterested editors in order to make sure you’re being neutral.
Marketers should exercise good judgment for each situation. Tactics
like micromanaging the exact text or wording of the article,
dominating the discussion, or pouncing on editors that make
mediocre, good-faith edits to the page may offer small, short-term
gains in content outcomes, at the significant expense of long-term
relationships and comfort levels with Wikipedians. Consider asking
other editors to get more heavily involved in controversial areas where
the company is unlikely to be neutral.
10 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
Things to avoid
There is no catch-all advice in upholding the various principles and
concepts introduced in this e-book. They must be applied
intellectually to the circumstance.
However, there are some very common mistakes marketers make on
Wikipedia, which we’ll cover here in a check-list format. Readers
should be advised that these are general guidelines and there may be
exceptions that apply to individual circumstances.
! Avoid promotional sections like Awards, Philanthropy,
Recognition or Corporate Social Responsibility.
! Avoid creating separate articles on the company and its
products if they can be consolidated
! Avoid creating an excessively detailed article in general.
! Avoid bullets in most cases, especially if they are long lists of
individual products, partners, locations or executives.
! Avoid articles that are focused on products or executives rather
than the organization’s heritage.
! Avoid using citations that merely repeat what the company told
them, such as re-written press releases.
! Avoid using too many primary sources, such as the company
website.
! Avoid using an overly official tone or writing style, both in the
article’s content and in discussions with editors.
11 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
Five approaches to Wikipedia marketing
Often the assumption is that the only role for marketers on Wikipedia
is to write the article, but this is not true. We’ve divided Wikipedia
marketing into five different approaches that may each be valid in
different circumstances.
A hands-off policy is preferred for organizations that:
• do not meet Wikipedia’s requirements for an article
• have a negative reputation not represented on the page
• are extremely risk-adverse or do not want to invest resources
Monitoring and response is a good approach for those that
• are primarily interested in responding to matters of factual
accuracy
• are reasonably happy with the article’s current state
Public relations support of volunteer editors is desirable if:
• there are highly engaged editors that will use resources the
company provides, such as images, citations and expertise
• the subject-matter is too sensitive for the company to author it
Content marketing by offering content for consideration is preferred
when:
• the company has access to expertise and will devote the
substantial time-resources required
• the only practical way to obtain a fair article is to author it
• the company wants predictable, consistent results
Direct editing is an option for companies that:
• do not feel the legal and/or ethical implications are important or
significant
• are making clerical edits like improving grammar or citation
formatting
12 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
Company policy
Many large companies have social media
policies in place intended to ensure
compliance with the FTC’s astroturfing
regulations and avoid any
misunderstandings.
For example, say an administrative
assistant, janitor, or executive have personal
Twitter handles and often tweet about their
employer’s latest product announcements.
Company policy may suggest that they
To avoid misunderstandings,
disclose that they work for the company on
create disclosure policies for
their Twitter profile. This is to avoid the
employees similar to what may
already be in place for Twitter.
appearance of promoting the company
without disclosing a financial connection as required by the FTC.
The lack of similar corporate policies for Wikipedia has become
apparent in a number of media controversies. In many cases
companies are accused of manipulating Wikipedia entries, when it is
actually the edits of an individual at the company acting out of their
own volition. Many companies overlook Wikipedia in educating
employees about online disclosure.
Pre-existing policies for other digital channels may be easily adapted
for Wikipedia and lumped into the same process for educating staff.
In general, employees should be asked to disclose their employment at
the company if they edit articles related to it on their free time. In
some cases, companies may simply ask employees not to edit the
company’s article(s) at all. This is a grey area in Wikipedia’s own
rules and it is not unusual for an employee with no connection to
marketing to get in trouble on Wikipedia for conflict of interest, even
if they were participating on a volunteer basis.
13 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
How to
This section is dedicated to tactical, how-to instructions, for marketers
that have never edited Wikipedia before and need help with coding,
the user interface and other details.
How to write content
Technically speaking, Wikipedia’s content policies are vast,
complicated, nuanced and require extensive experience to understand.
However, the basic tenants of writing for Wikipedia are actually quite
simple.
Content should be written neutrally, it should be cited to credible,
independent sources we can trust, and it should be representative of
the total body of literature available on the subject.
We won’t cover Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines extensively here,
especially because Wikipedia has no firm rules and is guided largely
by good judgment from experienced editors. However, marketers that
want to author content about their client or employer should consider
getting experience editing other articles first.
There is some wiki-code you should familiarize yourself with:
• At the end of each sentence, add the code: <ref></ref>. In
between the two ref tags, add a citation for where the content
comes from, such as a news article. Consider putting citations
into coded templates, so they are easier to read.
• The Infobox template for company pages is a good way to add
basic information like number of employees, the company
website and the date the organization was founded.
• The title of sections of the article should be between two equal
signs “==” while sub-sections have three “===”
14 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
• If you mention a topic that has its own Wikipedia article, you
may want to link to its Wikipedia artticle using double brackets.
“[[Foundry]]” for example would like to the article on
foundries.
• Add “{{reflist}}” under a “==References==” section near the
bottom of the article. This will publish a list of all the citations
used in the article.
How to Communicate with editors
Click here to register an account on Wikipedia. Among other things,
this will create a personal message board where other editors can
contact you. You should also login with your new account before
posting comments or making edits.
At the top of each Wikipedia article is a bar with several tabs.
Wikipedia is openly editable, meaning anyone can click the “Edit”
button and change the article’s contents at any time, but as a marketer,
you’ll be relying heavily on the Talk tab. Once you click on “Talk”
the toolbar will change slightly.
Consider skimming the discussion so far to get a sense of the article’s
history, what editors are talking about and which users are most active
on the page.
To start a new discussion, click “New Section” in the toolbar. Write
out your comments and sign it by adding four tildes “~~~~”.
15 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
If you are requesting a factual correction, you may consider adding
“{{request edit}}” above your comment. This adds a template and
places the request in a queue for consideration.
Click the “Save Page” button at the bottom of the screen to post your
comment, which will show up on a feed for editors who have the
article on their watchlist.
In the upper right hand corner of the screen is another set of options.
The Talk button is where other editors will leave messages for you
and the number (a zero in the screenshot) will show notifications
where editors have mentioned you or left a message for you.
Other editors that participated on the Talk page of the article will also
have their comments signed. The signature has a link to their personal
Talk page where you can reach out to them directly.
Another way to reach out to editors is to find editors that have been
active on the page by clicking on View History and identifying active
participants. Then go to their Talk pages and leave them a message
directly.
You can also use Noticeboards to post messages that are not directed
at a specific editor, but are advertised broadly for input. A key one is
the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard, which is a good place to ask for
help. Noticeboards work just like other Talk pages. You can click
“New section” to start a new post.
Wikipedia has additional contact instructions on the Contact us –
article subjects page, including an email info-en-q@wikimedia.org.
16 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
Selected links
• LinkedIn Group: Ethical Wikipedia Marketing & PR
• Best Practices Guidance for Public Relations Professionals Chartered Institute of Public Relations
• Wikipedia Overview PPT - Ethical Wiki
• Q&A on Public Relations and Wikipedia – Wikipedia SignPost
• Conflict of Interest Guideline - Wikipedia
• Paid advocacy FAQ - Jimmy Wales
• .com Disclosures Guide - Federal Trade Commission
• Advice for PR agencies - PR Squared/Ethical Wiki
• Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines - Wikipedia
17 | Ethics in Wikipedia Marketing
About the author
David King is a Wikipedia consultant and the
founder of Ethical Wiki. He has created more
than 10 percent of Wikipedia’s most highly
ranked articles about companies. King has made
more than 20,000 edits to Wikipedia over the
last five years.
He is a regular speaker and educator on the
importance of Wikipedia and of ethics in
corporate participation. In his role at Ethical
Wiki, he helps companies offer content, request
corrections and discuss controversies with
Wikipedia’s editors, while strictly adhering to
the firm’s Statement of Ethics.