Wikipedia entries are intended to provide objective, unbiased information about their subjects. But companies in the digital marketing world often see them as an opportunity for free marketing.
This makes sense. Wikipedia listings typically rank high in search results. Kudos in that regard. And yet, there’s a grubbiness factor of these companies stooping to manufacture their own Wikipedia pages, and sometimes doing it in such a way that they’re caught red-handed by the Wikipedia police.
“AKQA is an ideas and innovation company specializing in creating digital services, products, communications and experiences,” reads the opening line of AKQA’s listing, for example. “This article appears to be written like an advertisement,” Wikipedia editors posit in a stark warning at the top.
Agencies appear to be the worst offenders, at least in Wikipedia’s eyes. The likes of Goodby Silverstein and Partners, Phenomblue, and VML are all called out for having overly promotional content on their pages, and for the fact that major contributors appear to have “close connections” with their subjects. “VML is a leading full-service digital agency” isn’t exactly what Wikipedia deems objective information, it appears.
Perhaps surprisingly, articles about vendors don’t appear as self-promotional as those of agencies, at least in Wikipedia’s eyes. (You have to wonder if the editors have bothered to get there.) It has fewer complaints about the entries of ad networks and ad technology firms highlighting new products than it does agencies like 360i listing their awards and “library” of whitepapers. The entry for mobile ad network Millennial Media, for example, goes into detail about its products and the benefits they provide both advertisers and publishers. Its only rivals are Apple and Google, apparently, although Facebook is listed as a “potential competitor.”
Some companies choose to be a little more creative with their Wikipedia strategies than just writing their own pages, however, and attempt to inject themselves into Wikis for industry terms or concepts. Sharethrough community manager Thomas Channick wrote much of the entry describing “native advertising,” for example, complete with a reference to his company’s “open native advertising platform,” of course.
Here are some of the more dubious entries we spotted around Wikipedia for ad firms and agencies. Send suggestions to me at the address below, and we’ll ad them to the list.
Image via Shutterstock
Wave of AI-based marketing startups arrives as Microsoft, Google rush AI-based products to market
As Microsoft and Google compete with generative content, much smaller firms are building their own tech to tackle new territory
Digiday+ Research: On the eve of the Super Bowl, brands much prefer advertising on CTV over traditional TV
Brands prefer investing in connected TV over traditional TV — if they're spending on TV at all, a Digiday+ Research survey found.
Pinterest jockeys for position in platforms arms race for short-form video
The company’s recent deal with Conde Nast was just the start.
SponsoredAdvertising predictions that will shake up the media industry in 2023
Chris Kelly, CEO, Upwave Like many people, marketers and advertisers were ready to see 2022 come to a close. A year that started off promising was assailed by inflation, layoffs and the disastrous effects of RSV, the flu and additional COVID strains. Still, despite an uncertain outlook for 2023, there are plenty of reasons for […]
Will Twitter continue to be where brands comment on the Super Bowl – or will TikTok play usurper?
As TikTok continues to dominate marketing conversations, experts sound off on whether or not it will become the future second screen for live events.
Brands stay silent on Tyre Nichols killing as marketers signal it as an industry backslide
Compared to the things that were said and acted upon during the murder of George Floyd and the protests that took place three years ago, many brands have been relatively quiet around Tyre Nichols.