3 ms·
As others have noted, I don't think this is an entirely unique situation. The decentralized nature of Wikipedia's editorship results in these kind of situations
by FillardMillmore 7y ago
As others have noted, I don't think this is an entirely unique situation. The decentralized nature of Wikipedia's editorship results in these kind of situations with fair frequency.
> Something can be factually true, but where there is a number of facts, choosing the less important ones and omitting the more important ones tends to lead to wrong conclusions. According to sources, Tito was both an autocrat and a dictator, and stating only the milder qualification is an unacceptable act, an act of vandalism.
I think the above quote from the article gets to the root of the problem - when it comes to politics and history (especially on Wikipedia), the game of framing can always be played where something can be made to look either good or bad by the accentuation of certain facts and the omission or downplaying of other facts.
- MaxBarraclough 7y agoIt's the same game you play if you're a 'journalist' with a pre-decided narrative. Let that narrative filter what gets reported, and what gets emphasised, and you don't even have to lie.
- ta09876 7y agoNot sure why the parent is gray, except maybe the scare quotes around "journalist". You absolutely can influence the narrative with your choice of which 10 stories to run of the 100 you have.
- seppel 7y agoIt is interesting. * The English wiki says "while his presidency has been criticized as authoritarian [..], Tito has traditionally been seen as a benevolent dictator." * The German wiki calls Tito a dictatorial head of state. * In the Italian wiki his is clearly a "dittatore". * The spanish one does not seem to judge. * Neither does the french one.
- BrandoElFollito 7y agoThe French one has "La dictature" as one of the headers in the biography, and give examples of why he was a dictator.