Today's vilified, dangerous Web is the Wikipedia, according to a Washington Post article. Ahrens writes with a breezy mixture of sneer and fear:
Unlike, say, the Encyclopedia Britannica, Wikipedia has no formal peer review for its articles. They may be written by experts or insane crazy people. Or worse, insane crazy people with an agenda. And Internet access.
The author backs up towards balance by the end, although the steps are odd (the Wikipedia is good at Star Trek?) and overshadowed by what went earlier. Which, ironically, is a case of what the author complains about: people iterating and correcting the 'pedia over time.
In educational settings, I'm still getting signals that the Wikipedia is a sort of nexus for academic dislike of all things digital.
(via the Technology Liberation Front)