The Web Runs on Love, Not Greed
Fri, 4 Jan 2002 14:10:57 -0800 (PST)
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, carey wrote:
> Again, I dont' agree, but I used it to make a point about how publication =!
> better content.
i didn't say this though. i said editing (should amend that to good
editing) = better content. which is not to mention other things paper pubs
traditionall get -- planning, indexing.. experienced staff. these things
lead to better content. i never equated a binding with better content, you
only said i did.
i wasn't thinking of watered-down dictionaries aimed at the 10-12 year old
crowd when i mentioned dictionaries, either. nor was i thinking of world
book when i mentioned encyclopedias.
> His argument was relatively subjective -- to him, the net
> offered little in the way of fact/truly certifiable content
not little -- just too little. and the fact-checking is just one of my
complaints. breadth and scope are also way too narrow. writing quality is
too poor.. copy editing is practically non-existent. subject matter is
more or less driven either by financial considerations (which articles
will get the most hits for us?) or one person's personal interests.
> offered a lot of 'other'. To my aunt an dher school, these dictionaries,
> while offering content did nto offer good content.
don't get me started on california public schools next -- that's something
i'm just finding out about, seeing as my daughter is now in one. and as
for the publishers which market to them - ugh!