summarise the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they oppose the specific points made in the reading passage.

The article introduces the topic which is about how communal online encyclopedias content less accurate than the traditional & printed encyclopedias. The professor’s lecture casts doubt on the reading by using a number of contrary points, he says communal online encyclopedia information never be perfect but still have more reliable content than traditional and print media. First, the author says that the content available on online sites has incomplete academic information and they are partially reliable. The professor believes there are flaws in the author’s position. He contends that communal online encyclopedias content is hardly criticized. He goes on to say that online information site updates their content in a timely manner and contains more comprehensive details than printed encyclopedias. Thus reasons, online information is accurate whereas there is no possibility to edit printed encyclopedia content as their errors always stay for decades. According to the writer, even if the information in online encyclopedias is perfect still it could be a chance that hackers corrupt the data which is not possible in the traditional encyclopedia. On the other hand, the professor says online website does great formatting of the site & hires a person who keeps monitoring on the activity of sites to make sure the content is reliable. Also, the reading passage states that the in-depth information present on online sites makes readers confuse to understand which one is considerable whereas printed encyclopedia only focuses on the most informative content. The professors refutes this argument, he says the communal online encyclopedia has unlimited space for accurate information which attracts readers' interest and gives a complete view of topic. On the opposite side, traditional or printed have limited space which doesn’t reflect the users. It's clear to see that the writer and professor hold conflicting views. They both have trouble finding common grounds on the same topic.
Submitted by ashina neema on
What to do next: