tpo6

Recently, there has been a ton of debate about communal online encyclopedias. More specifically, in regard to the passage, the writer puts forth the idea that online encyclopedias have three problems that make them less valuable than printed encyclopedias. On the other hand, in the listening passage, the professor is quick to point out there are some serious flaws in the writer’s claims. In fact, the professor believes that online encyclopedias will never be perfect, but there is a small price to pay, and addresses, in detail, the trouble with each point made in the reading text.

First and foremost, the author of the reading states that online encyclopedias information is informed inaccurate by nonspecialists because they lack academic credentials. In contrast to the traditional encyclopedias are written by trained experts. Some professionals in the same field, however, stand in firm opposition to this claim. In the lecture, for example, the instructor refutes that if we need references without any mistakes on or off online that it will be hard to find it. Additionally, he goes on to say that in online encyclopedias, any errors can be corrected easily, while in the printed one stays for a decade without any change. As a result, the professor shows the weakness of the author’s first point.

One group of scholars, represented by the writer, think that communal online will give hackers and vandals the opportunity to fabricate, delete, and corrupt information. In response, the traditional encyclopedias none of these will happen with printed encyclopedias. Of course, though, not all experts in this field believe this is accurate. Again, the speaker specifically addresses this point when he explains that by making a format that will be difficult to change or by hiring a specialist editor to monitor the printer encyclopedias, otherwise, we can not protect the printed one from hacking. Consequently, the professor displays the limitation of the author’s second theory.

Finally, the writer wraps his argument by positing that online encyclopedias create a false impression of what is important and what is not because they are too frequently and popular topics. However, the traditional one provides a considered view of what topics and have a sense of proportion. Not surprisingly, the lecturer takes issue with this claim by contending that in the tradition cyclopedias have limited space to put what is important and what is not. Indeed, the online cyclopedias have more space to add or reflect users’ interests which is a strong advantage. In this way, the professor presents the inaccuracy of the writer’s reason.