Michael Gorman has posted a (severely flawed) two-part rant against the internet in  general, and “Web 2.0” in particular, on the Encyclopedia Britannica blog.  While community-driven information repositories like Wikipedia may occasionally be less than perfect on individual subjects (it is by definition a constant work-in-progress), they are on average at least as accurate and usually more comprehensive than traditional top-down scholarly compilations.

The post’s comments refute his claims in a more thorough manner than I can, but I would at least like to point out that it is more than a tad ironic that he decries the evils of web 2.0 on a comment-enabled, rss-fed blog post.