Slashdot Mirror
Britannica Attacks - Nature Returns Fire
An anonymous reader writes "Just in case you missed it, Nature has replied to Britannica's criticism of the Nature Britannica-Wikipedia comparison. I think it is fair to say Nature is not sympathetic to Britannica's complaints." The original piece regarding the accuracy comparison, along with the response from Britannica.
"original piece"
One thing that should be said: Encyclopaedia Britannica has sold its print version by sending extremely high-pressure salesmen into poor neighborhoods to imply that if poor families didn't buy Britannica their children would always be ignorant. Parents were often extremely intimidated.
Families who had no habit of reading books would buy the print version of Britannica and pay for it in installments. My impression is that the books were almost never read. I've seen bookcases of expensive books that have never been opened. If children never see their parents reading, the children usually won't read either.
From the Nature response:
"While we were quite willing to discuss the issues, the company [Britannica] failed to provide specific details of its complaints when we asked for them in order to be able to assess its allegations. We did not receive any further correspondence until the publication of its open letter on 22 March 2006. It is regrettable that Britannica chose to make its objections public without first informing us of them and giving us a chance to respond."
This seems to me to be another abuse of the public's trust. Britannica responded with a confident-sounding ad when actually the company wanted to avoid discussion.
And that abuse got them into a Slashdot story once again.
I'd like to see a study of the sociology of arrogant company executives with sink-the-company ideas.
--
Before, Saddam got Iraq oil profits & paid part to kill Iraqis. Now a few Americans share Iraq oil profits, & U.S. citizens pay to kill Iraqis. Improvement?