4 ms·
I think some wikipedia editors (and editor brigades like "Philip Cross") are making a living from the activity you describe.
by jessaustin 5y ago
I think some wikipedia editors (and editor brigades like "Philip Cross") are making a living from the activity you describe.
- ilamont 5y agoAbsolutely. Wikipedia itself acknowledges the problem: Many Wikipedians have seen the effects that paid advocates can have on an article. These paid editors tend to make obviously biased edits, be very persistent, and are easily identifiable. But some of them are much more sophisticated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-09-27/Special_report https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2...
- jessaustin 5y agoThat's a fascinating link; thanks! I have the sense that we are glimpsing the iceberg above the waterline. It's only when these actors make apparently silly mistakes around perceptive people that they can even be detected. Another example would be the whole weird Mexican social media political conspiracy that "Reply All" covered a few years ago. [0] How many of these organizations are doing this? When we do somehow detect one, can we learn anything from that? It's possible that intentionally revealing "secrets" actually serves some secret purpose. [0] https://gimletmedia.com/shows/reply-all/j4hl36/112-the-prophet https://gimletmedia.com/shows/reply-all/j4hl36/112-the-proph...