On Facebook, articles that trend are those who received the most votes, shared by friends or family, or selected by by algorithms based on prior interests. Alt

On Facebook, articles that trend are those who received the most votes, shared by friends or family, or selected by by algorithms based on prior interests. Although truth/accuracy is said to be a goal, it's a "social network", not a "truth network" and is not a recognized purveyor of factual data. On Wikipedia, reality is usually whatever some erstwhile editor can scrounge up that backs up their preferred narrative. As journalists overwhelmingly self-identity as liberal/progressive, it's trivial for a single, anonymous editor to shop around for MSM articles that back up the narrative. That, combined with WikiMedia actually hosting & funding "edit-thons" for progressive activist groups, it is no wonder why Wikipedia is viewed by many as having a liberal bent. Yet, it DOES hold itself as a trustworthy purveyor of factual information. One of those seems a lot more democratic than the other, but it's the more democratic option that's usually used as the negative example.