4 ms·
Frankly, wikipedia’s gotten significantly worse as a source of knowledge over the last few years as well. Tons and tons of astroturfing & bias with articles.
by LewisVerstappen 3y ago
Frankly, wikipedia’s gotten significantly worse as a source of knowledge over the last few years as well.
Tons and tons of astroturfing & bias with articles.
There’s obviously tons of politicial bias but there’s also lots of individuals writing their own bias as a “uninterested third party” when in reality they’re emphasizing the narrative most favorable to them.
You see it a ton with wikipedia pages of entrepreneurs, journalists & obviously politicians.
- newaccount74 3y agoThat has always been the case on Wikipedia. Some articles have editors watching over them who revert any edit that doesn't fit their narrative.
- joker_minmax 3y agoI see this happening a lot more than it used to, though. Even if the edits are "I changed this quote because it's a fringe theory that misleads readers about what [article topic theory] represents", the edit will be reverted so that the misleading text remains, to serve a point.
- FreshStart 3y agoIt turns out states and companies can donate full-time personal to subvert a open source foundation.
- hulitu 3y ago> also lots of individuals writing their own bias and 3 letter agencies. Whenever a subject is a bit sensitive, you can feel their influence.