EA gives no mea culpa on Wiki controversy
Electronic Arts was caught red-fingered yesterday revising the company's Wikipedia profile and removing some key people (founder Trip Hawkins) and controversies (EA Spouse) from its history. Statements given by an EA spokesperson to GamesIndustry.biz concerning the matter indicate that the publisher feels that its employees committed no wrongdoing. "Many companies routinely post updates on websites like Wikipedia to ensure accuracy of their own corporate information," said the spokesperson (emphasis added by us). Of course, omitting key information -- such as who created your company -- is itself inaccurate.
As previously noted, many of the edits have already been reversed by the Wikipedia community.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Rare Hare @ Aug 17th 2007 2:20PM
Click here to see EA's Wikipedia shenanigans backfire on them:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Arts#Editing_of_Wikipedia
pwned.
Smartshot187 @ Aug 17th 2007 2:23PM
nice job ea
KirbyMeister @ Aug 17th 2007 2:24PM
There's an editor policy in the Wikipedia: namespace that states that people/corps should not edit their own articles. Bannable offense much?
Neebs @ Aug 17th 2007 2:49PM
Yep. It's called Vanity.
JL @ Aug 17th 2007 2:27PM
HAHA! F*cking idiots!
WiNG @ Aug 17th 2007 2:28PM
No wonder the article claimed that EA was an innovative, revolutionary company that thrives on competition!
WiNG @ Aug 17th 2007 2:30PM
also on apparently the same topic, turns out the FBI and CIA were also changing a lot of articles.
Word of the street. @ Aug 17th 2007 2:36PM
I wonder why?, Lol.
Hey what is that Pizza van doing outside my house?
Donald @ Aug 18th 2007 12:28AM
It's stuck in line behind the Flowers By Irene party van.
ScreamingSkull @ Aug 18th 2007 11:56PM
Dave's not here man..
Word of the street. @ Aug 17th 2007 2:30PM
Why they tried to erase Trip Hawkins anyway?
You can’t blame a company for trying to improve their image even when they are doing it WRONG!! , this is kind of paranoid I mean really when anyone has said "I'm not buying Medal of honor airborne because the EA Spouse controversy”, I have heard “I'm not buying Madden 07 because Ea releases a Madden game every nine months or so and they take out the madden servers of the oldest versions forcing you to buy a new Madden game”.
Fiztaru @ Aug 20th 2007 3:16PM
I can absolutely blame a company when their preferred method of trying to improve their image includes replacing facts with spin. And if people refrain from buying their games because they do not want to support a company that engages in these practices, more power to them.
Pixelantes Anonymous @ Aug 17th 2007 3:10PM
If they were really interested in "accuracy", they wouldn't purge Trip Hawkins from the corproate record.
What an idiot response. Anyone with half a clue sees right through that.
Chocolatier @ Aug 17th 2007 3:12PM
This whole "scandal" is being blown a bit out of proportion. The only thing the Wikipedia Tracker proves is that an EA owned IP address made edits, albeit sweeping ones, to the Wikipedia page. This isn't evidence of a major EA conspiracy, it could just be one or more overzealous employees.
Of course I'll jump right on the bash EA bandwagon if someone uncovers the "Erase Trip Hawkins" memo or something.
BPM @ Aug 17th 2007 3:17PM
This EA rep admits to the editings made by an/some EA employee(s). And the reason was to "ensure accuracy," when it did only the opposite, to make EA look better.
So, something tells me it wasn't just one overzealous employee.
Griff @ Aug 17th 2007 3:42PM
Fair enough, but the rep doesn't state that the deletion of Trip Hawkins or the deletion of EA Spouse data was the work of this "accuracy rep." I know a few people that routinely monitor the content of wikipedia pages for their companies, schools, or favorite teams. There's no way to know that EA was actively revising history as a corporate policy.
It just seems so stupid to me, and such a waste of company time. When you consider how big EA's PR marchine is, it seems like trying to change Wikipedia would be a futile effort with no return on the time invested.
Joshua @ Aug 17th 2007 5:03PM
The spokesperson acknowledged what happened and stated outright the company made the edits.
As for me, I just have another reason to never buy anything that has to do with EA (my policy's been going strong since early 2002!)
Dale @ Aug 17th 2007 3:13PM
Why don't these companies ever realise that when you are caught red-handed, lying makes you look worse and not better?
Randy @ Aug 17th 2007 4:44PM
Ask RockStar if they learned that lesson...
Richard @ Aug 17th 2007 3:13PM
BOYCOTT EA. Greedy jerk bastards!!
Christopher7xii @ Aug 17th 2007 3:27PM
teehee. Silly EA, Wikis are for nerds!
EihBeir @ Aug 17th 2007 3:29PM
The EA asshattery continues uninterrupted.
K2Valor @ Aug 17th 2007 3:31PM
EA = Phail
Mr Khan @ Aug 17th 2007 4:20PM
Such is the double-edged sword of Wikipedia's freedom
Fortunately, the righteous outnumber the asshats, at least where Wikipedia is concerned
AoE @ Aug 17th 2007 4:37PM
lol, good thing you qualified that Mr Khan... this is the internet after all ;)
Poisoned Al @ Aug 17th 2007 4:39PM
Thank you EA. I needed another reason to dislike you.
Miles Pulsford @ Aug 17th 2007 7:54PM
You really needed another reason?
Poisoned Al @ Aug 18th 2007 4:30PM
No, but they are nice to have around. They are a bugger to dust tho.
Mark @ Aug 17th 2007 5:03PM
From the EA Wiki page:
"Electronic Arts announced it would not support the Sega Dreamcast unless it sold 1 million units. When this happened within a record 90 days, EA went back on their word and declined to support the Dreamcast in favour of Sony's PlayStation 2."
Some things can never be forgiven. Rot in hell EA.
AoE @ Aug 17th 2007 6:35PM
I always thought the Dreamcast being free of EA games was actually a great service on their part... it kept the number of crap games released on the DC amazingly low vs any other console.
Yoshi @ Aug 19th 2007 12:01AM
@ AoE
...sad, but true.
Grei @ Aug 21st 2007 1:31AM
Historical accuracy is entirely inconvenient, let me just fix that.