3 ms·
> Wikipedia is simply not trustworthy on anything remotely political due to the extreme ideological slant of its editors. This reminds me of when the BBC repor
by hk__2 2y ago
> Wikipedia is simply not trustworthy on anything remotely political due to the extreme ideological slant of its editors.
This reminds me of when the BBC reported that they get "complaints from people who feel that [their] reporting of the conflict has been biased against Israel, and complaints from those who feel it has been biased against the Palestinians" [1]. In my experience with the French Wikipedia, it’s the same there, with people from both sides complaining the encyclopedia is biased in favor of the other side.
[1]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/complaint/israel-gazacoverage https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/complaint/israel-gazacoverage
- bawolff 2y agoThe two aren't mutually exclusive. Like they could be biased about certain parts in one direction but the other direction in another. I think we humans have the unfortunate tendency to view things as binary - you are either biased for one side or another. However when we are talking about something like wikipedia with lots of authors or even something like bbc where different articles are written by different people, i think its entirely possible for it to be biased against both sides (and for both sides) in different aspects.
- _carbyau_ 2y agoThat "view things as binary" is a real problem. The world is more detailed, convoluted, fascinating and complex than a binary viewpoint allows.