The reading provides three reasons why online encyclopedias are not as good as traditional encyclopedias. However, the professor in the lecture disagrees with the points in the reading for several reasons.
To begin, while the errors in online encyclopedias may number more than traditional encyclopedias, they are more easily corrected than published encyclopedias. Online documents are, in a sense, living documents. Editors can make revisions when new information comes out and incorporate these changes in real time.
Changes to online encyclopedias by hackers can happen. While this is a concern put forward in the reading, the lecturer handily counters by stating that editors monitor changes, and that crucial facts are protected within the website through read-only formatting. Whereas researchers may come upon altered information in online encyclopedias, these malicious attacks are prevented and corrected for by the editorial staff of the online encyclopedias.
Finally, the significance of information is questioned in the reading, but the lecturer again debunks the claim by explaining that traditional print encyclopedias have limited space, over which an editorial board judges what ought to be included. However, there is no limit to the space of online encyclopedias, and the diversity of views and information is the greatest advantage that the online version offers as it reflects the much broader interests of the public than published encyclopedias ever could.
(222 words)