the wiki-guards

The wonderful thing about web 2.0 is supposed to be the two-way dialog. Brands are supposed to let their guard down, be transparent, and be ready to take any kind of feedback that they get online...right? Wrong, if you are a political candidate (and the discussion of branding political candidates is a totally other can of worms that I'll open at another time).

Take this, for example: Jonathan Schilling, a name you've never heard of, yet he spends about 15 hours per week editing Hilary Clinton's Wikipedia page. Why? To make sure that the image of a walrus that replaced her picture doesn't stay up there. Basically, he monitors Hillary Clinton as we know her...online.

So if political candidates are a brand, and we are taught to let brands take what they are given online, then what does this mean? Is this a problem, or would it be a complete disaster if her wiki page was just left to the wolves? Where are the lines here people!?