It’s been almost a month since I blogged about the Chronicle of Higher Education, the “flagship” of the ivory tower had published on their web site misinformation that it had scooped from some other blog sites on a story about the 2007 NMC Horizon Report. The Chronicle wrote on December 17 that the 2007 report was “released last week” when it was published on January 21, 2007 at the annual EDUCAUSE/ELI Conference, where I am fairly sure I recall there were Chronicle reporters in attendance.
I duly noted this in a comment.
Apparently, the Chronicle website, labeled at the top as “The Wired Campus” does not get or pay attention to comments on its site, does not monitor blog trackback, does not use web 2.0 tools to monitor references to their stories from elsewhere on the internet. Man, are those ivory walls thick! I bet wireless signals cannot penetrate.
My colleagues at EDUCAUSE, who are are partners on the Horizon Report, are doing the New Scholarship thang as they keep forwarding me more and more blogs, from academics, who keep parrot meming the same wrong information- the latest one.
So is checking facts something that falls out of the wash on New Scholarship? What about correcting incorrect information? Do we need a flame thrower to get the attention of the Chronicle? (doubtful that will work, there are those thick walls). Actually I know I could call someone, but the point, to me, is not to just fix the misinformation, but to point out the perils of acting like Web 2.0 rather than acting in a Web 2.0 mindset.
I am not saying we have to be perfect in publishing, and I am first to admit I have gotten things wrong before, But darn it, if you get something wrong, and people bring it to your attention, why would you not correct it? Why would you let wrong information hang out in the breeze?
Yes, this is minor (and IMHO disturbing), but someone has to stir up the pot…
So for the 2008 Horizon Report, I am suggestion we put in giant 80 point text, HEY CHRONICLE! THIS REPORT WAS PUBLISHED ON JANUARY 28, 2008!