Of course, this would be a much more heavy-handed approach than what is proposed here for Wikipedia. Turning off a site is a clear message, it's very direct and

Of course, this would be a much more heavy-handed approach than what is proposed here for Wikipedia. Turning off a site is a clear message, it's very direct and not manipulative beyond declaring your support either way. Changing the algorithm is more insidious, unless or even if you had a disclaimer on top saying you modified the result to fit your agenda. I think this is comparable to modifying the Wikipedia SOPA article to be non-neutral, which is a terrible idea of course. In the same vein, I don't think blanking Wikipedia can violate NPOV (in its Wikipedia sense), since this policy refers to editorial content: the articles themselves need to be neutral. The concept of NPOV is simply not applicable to the Wikipedia enterprise as a whole.