A.L.Barger member for 34 weeks 18 hours Send a message

I'm only half-joking when I say, "I've been writing for the web since there was a web." Today, writing for the web is more than 90% of what I do for a living. But I find myself becoming increasingly disgruntled with the amount of garbage out there.

Case in point: the Wikipedia article on the T.V. show M.A.S.H implies that actor Timothy Brown was removed from the show because "there is no record of African-American doctors serving in Korea".

But the obituary for Dr. Joseph Clatayon Gathe, SR.--as published in African-American News & Issues-- claims that he "proudly joined the U.S. Air Force as a flight surgeon" and was honorably discharged in 1956 after serving in Korea.

Is nitpicking Wikipedia fair? After all, it's user-generated content. So what about content where the author is positioning himself or herself as an expert? And what happens when that information could be potentially dangerous?

I see this every day in my field. Wanna'be herbalists often recommend the wrong species of an herb, mis-spell the names of herbs, confuse basic nutritional terms like "vitamins" and "minerals" and attest to the usefulness of "therapies" that have no scientific evidence to back them up.

Where does that leave our readers? They're expecting us, as authors, to do our homework and present quality info. But with all the gunk out there, how could they possibly know whom to trust these days?

What about you? What challenges to you face as a professional on the 'net? How do you counteract all the bad info your clients are faced with?