3 ms·
This just goes to show that wikipedia is not a trustworthy source for polemic topics. The very nature of the platform makes it too easy to manipulate by one or
by coliveira 8y ago
This just goes to show that wikipedia is not a trustworthy source for polemic topics. The very nature of the platform makes it too easy to manipulate by one or more individuals with an ideological position.
- whatshisface 8y agoI'm fortunate to have been around long enough to observe the "swinging bias" of Wikipedia. In 2008 the conservatives complianed that it was too liberal, but over time I've seen articles wander pretty far in every direction. I still think this is an advantage, though: if your entire reality is a specific classical news source it will seem unbiased and universal because your universe will be exactly it. Whereas if you mostly read Wikipedia then you will see the bias because the center of mass of an article today might not be its center of mass tomorrow.
- TimTheTinker 8y agoFrom my vantage point (I identify best with the Constitution Party’s platform), Wikipedia has always been very liberal.
- retox 8y agoBeen plainly clear for many years. Gamergate really has a lot to answer for in terms of allowing people with first-hand knowledge of a topic to see how blatantly and maliciously falsified it is in all quarters of the media.