So I was writing a piece talking about how the Internet as a news outlet is becoming less and less legit. Online news blogs, wikipedia, all that good stuff. I decided to make a Wikipedia to see how long it stayed up to prove just how legitimate the site really is. This was what it said:
The cutest and coolest girl not only on the North American continent, but Earth as a whole. Born on August 31, 1988, Laura graced the entire planet with her grace, intelligence and all around liveliness. She is a plethora of knowledge, and has written stories ranging from airline travel during the holiday seasons, reality television to her most recent, a fabrication of a peyote trip that took place in Omaha, Nebraska. Laura is currently dabbling in free lance writing while studying journalism at Columbia College Chicago.
In my opinion, I didn't say anything that was false, I don't need to worry about any copyright or sources (maybe where it says "coolest girl" cause I'm sure some may disagree) so what's the issue? I originally had it as the first two lines just for shits and giggles; I realized I would have to have some sort of seriousness thrown in there, which is why I added the bit about where I am attending school and shit like that. Maybe the fact that I mentioned my peyote story I'm working on, but even so Wikipedia isn't even accepted in any form of academic sourcing so if they aren't technically legit, why can't they allow me to have my own outlet via their website? Pretty much what Wikipedia just did could be described as the ultimate rejection. I'll be back in a few years, just give me some time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment