Skip to navigationSkip to content
Close
Facebook, Axios And NBC Paid A Guy To Whitewash Wikipedia Pages

Facebook, Axios And NBC Paid A Guy To Whitewash Wikipedia Pages

Read more on Huffington Post

Contributions

  • Wikipedia being co-opted by the powerful seems to be a "well-known secret". I spoke to an academic who studies power concentrations in society once and he mentioned, in passing, how Wikipedia was an incredible political tool for rich entities (Big Tech, governments, intelligence agencies). If Facebook

    Wikipedia being co-opted by the powerful seems to be a "well-known secret". I spoke to an academic who studies power concentrations in society once and he mentioned, in passing, how Wikipedia was an incredible political tool for rich entities (Big Tech, governments, intelligence agencies). If Facebook, Axios et al are taking advantage of Wikipedia, imagine who else is as well?

    Having said that, we shouldn't rush to condemn all of Wikipedia. These edits that breach Wikipedia's code account for a minority of contributions (albeit potentially more impactful ones).

    How do we solve this? There is only so much policing can achieve. The root of the problem is the rich entities corrupting something that's fundamentally good for the many. The solution therefore is political.

  • Sample SAT analogy question...

    Sussman : Wikipedia pages

    A. Singer : college entrance exams

    B. Holmes : blood test results

    C. McFarland : festival tickets

    D. Too soon?

  • Whitewashing Wikipedia in principle should be addressed, challenged and corrected by the community. The challenge for this model is obvious from the article, that there is great opportunity for abuse. But there is also an even worse case for the opportunity to abuse through a manipulative majority opinion

    Whitewashing Wikipedia in principle should be addressed, challenged and corrected by the community. The challenge for this model is obvious from the article, that there is great opportunity for abuse. But there is also an even worse case for the opportunity to abuse through a manipulative majority opinion. A concern for a tyranny of the majority, as per Alexis de Tocqueville, through to John Stuart Mill and the Federalists, manipulating Wikipedia for specific interest, is the nightmare of all who use Wikipedia.

  • ‘On his website, [Ed] Sussman identifies himself as “a journalist, lawyer, academic and technology entrepreneur” who “is often called upon in ‘crisis management’ situations where inaccurate or misleading information has been placed in a Wikipedia article...’

    So he’s the Micheal Clayton of Wiki sans the chin, got it

  • Apparently persistence combined with a plethora of comment is the key.

  • This story really forces one to reflect on how dependent we are on the information Wikipedia provides, and our faith in its accuracy. While there is good reason to believe it’s founders and administrators are a paragon of integrity for operating their platform in a non-partisan fashion, but they cannot

    This story really forces one to reflect on how dependent we are on the information Wikipedia provides, and our faith in its accuracy. While there is good reason to believe it’s founders and administrators are a paragon of integrity for operating their platform in a non-partisan fashion, but they cannot control everything.

    It was a clever approach, and a disturbingly accurate assessment for an ideal way to best insidiously mold public opinion.

  • You can make a business of almost anything...