T.D. Adler - Page 2

Since the New York Post published e-mails detailing the alleged corruption of the Biden family’s foreign business dealings, editors on Wikipedia have censored the Post’s story and Fox News confirmation of some details. Editors cite recent discussions limiting their use as sources. Reporting by the Daily Caller confirming the authenticity of one key e-mail and Sinclair reporting confirming Hunter Biden is the subject of an FBI investigation are now also being suppressed.

In a piece for British magazine the Critic, American academics analyzed evidence of left-wing bias on Wikipedia. Noting research into Wikipedia’s left-wing bias and its increasing bans of conservative media, the authors point to a greater sign of bias: the enforcement of site policies on major political topics by administrators with special privileges on the site. They find in their analysis that editors favoring right-leaning views were six times more likely to be sanctioned than those favoring left-leaning views.

For years, the corporate media have touted Wikipedia as a tool against “fake news” and “conspiracy theories” in line with the messaging of the Wikimedia Foundation, owners of the site. Media recently praised the site’s handling of political controversies, where editors favor establishment media narratives such as when censoring and downplaying recent Hunter Biden revelations. The media also advanced Wikipedia as a credible source on the coronavirus pandemic and even as a general medical source, prompting wide use by Big Tech and a partnership with the World Health Organization, But in reality, Wikipedia comes up short in all categories.

The World Health Organization and the Wikimedia Foundation, which owns Wikipedia, announced a collaboration last week responding to “misinformation” on the coronavirus pandemic. As part of the collaboration, the W.H.O. has released several “fact-check” graphics on a free license so they can be used on Wikipedia and other sites owned by the Foundation. The partnership prompted criticism from some Wikipedia editors due to the W.H.O.’s mishandling of the pandemic in its early stages in China.

Despite efforts on Wikipedia to censor any mention of the New York Post’s bombshell revelations about Joe and Hunter Biden’s alleged involvement in potentially corrupt foreign business dealings, claiming the Post is an “unreliable” source, editors have since reluctantly allowed mentioning the story provided the Post is not cited. However, coverage has been largely confined to an article labeling the allegations a “conspiracy theory,” and editors have sought to portray the story as discredited or even as “Russian disinformation” in the article and in a “FAQ” on its discussion page.

Wikipedia has joined Twitter and Facebook in seeking to suppress revelations from the New York Post about Hunter Biden allegedly securing a meeting between his father, then-Vice President Joe Biden, and a high-level adviser to Ukrainian energy company Burisma where the younger Biden served as a board member and which faced serious corruption allegations. Editors recently deemed the Post an “unreliable source” on Wikipedia and cited this as a reason to exclude mention of the story.

Wikipedia users are no longer allowed to include “userboxes” on their profile page that express opposition to gay marriage following a discussion where predominantly left-wing editors argued such a stance was “discriminatory” and against site policy. Most userboxes pre-dated a U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage and were used by hundreds of editors. This included one expressing a personal view favoring traditional marriage, but advocating for states to decide.

Just as the corporate media have been smearing Donald Trump since he launched his successful run for the presidency, editors on Wikipedia have done the same. This has included a college professor at the beginning of Trump’s term pushing students to add attacks on the President, editors placing mocking or incendiary articles about him on the site’s front page, equating Trump with the Nazis, and advancing the Russian collusion and Ukraine “quid pro quo” smears that have dominated his Administration.

Following the murder of Trump supporter Aaron Danielson by self-identified Antifa member and Black Lives Matter activist Michael Reinoehl, editors on Wikipedia tried to add the execution-style killing to the page for the violent far-left group. Antifa supporters on the site argued Reinoehl was not a member of any Antifa organization and therefore the killing was not significant enough to mention in the article. One administrator, during a discussion of the incident, smeared Danielson as a “fascist” with another administrator agreeing with the remark.

Having previously pledged to impose a “code of conduct” on all sites owned by the Wikimedia Foundation, which owns Wikipedia, staff have finally published a draft version of the document for review by contributors to Foundation-owned sites. Numerous provisions, including on “preferred pronoun” usage, immediately raised concerns among users about their implications for free speech with some harassment provisions also seen as potentially undermining efforts to rein in bad editing.

Wikipedia’s page on the infamous dossier crafted by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele is heavily slanted in favor of treating the dossier as a credible document, despite it being debunked by multiple federal investigations. One reason for this bias is the page’s primary author, “Valjean” a.k.a. Paul Lee, who is also an active member of the anti-Trump “Resistance” on Twitter as “TheDudeSeesAll” and relentlessly pushes baseless claims on Wikipedia and social media that Trump is a Russian asset.

Members of a Reddit group for discussing Scotland found many articles on the Scots-language Wikipedia, purporting to be written in the language, were really written in a broken English imitation. Further examination of the articles revealed they were all edited or authored primarily by a single user who is one of Scots Wikipedia’s few administrators, users with special privileges on the site. The administrator is an American teenager not fluent in the language.

In the latest case of a conservative news outlet being targeted by editors on Wikipedia, an editor with a history of defending the violent left-wing Antifa group and smearing Antifa critic Andy Ngo on the site initiated a discussion on getting the Post Millenial banned using smears against Ngo, an editor for the outlet, in the opening post of the discussion. While not outright banned, Post-Millennial was formally declared “unreliable” on Wikipedia.

On Wikipedia criticism site Wikipediocracy, a user posted a sourcing analysis for articles about recent American politicians and found the news outlets cited in the articles were often left-wing. In gauging bias, the analysis relied on two separate sites measuring media bias. One showed a clear majority of sources were left-wing, while another showed a plurality. Both showed conservative outlets were a very small minority of sources.

On Wikipedia articles about former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, editors have worked to exclude or downplay evidence cited by the Justice Department in support of dismissing charges that claim Flynn knowingly made materially false statements to the FBI regarding conversations with a Russian Ambassador. Such evidence includes FBI agents believing he was not lying and Flynn only pleading guilty after prosecutors threatened to go after his son.

As Big Tech suppresses conservative views in the name of fighting “fake news,” tech titans like Google and Facebook turn to Wikipedia to provide another “fix” to the problem. Despite messaging from Wikipedia’s owners encouraging this trend, over the years Wikipedia and its sister sites have pushed hoaxes and false information into the media and academia.

Some of the most extreme political bias on Wikipedia involves editors who support the violent left-wing group Antifa and protect the group’s image on the site. This has included downplaying Antifa’s far-left views and violence, even censoring major incidents and involvement in recent rioting. Many Antifa supporters, including self-identified anarchists and socialists, have taken to smearing the group’s opponents to defend violence against those opponents and portray their concerns as paranoia.

Following a month of discussion involving over 150 Wikipedia editors, Fox News is no longer deemed “generally reliable” as a source on political and scientific topics, a downgrade from its prior status. The official finding by a three-person panel of administrators, users with advanced privileges on Wikipedia, was that “no consensus” existed on Fox’s reliability in those areas. The finding came in an election year despite a plurality of editors believing Fox should retain its status as a generally reliable source alongside CNN and the Guardian, one of Wikipedia’s third most-cited sources.

Last week a company named Wikiprofessionals was banned from Wikipedia after an editor identified accounts the firm allegedly used for undisclosed paid editing. In a subsequent discussion, editors agreed to delete articles reputedly created by the firm and have so far deleted over a dozen. Articles deleted include ones on executives of social media game company Zynga and a Qatari billionaire who married pop singer Janet Jackson.

Editors on Wikipedia had financial blog Zero Hedge banned as a Wikipedia source following a NBC News hit piece about its criticism of Black Lives Matter, which got the blog temporarily demonetized by Google and labeled “far-right” on its Wikipedia page. The Federalist, also targeted by the piece and threatened with demonetization, was smeared when editors repeated false claims in the initial piece followed by further negative edits to the outlet and founder Ben Domenech’s pages. Both were previously smeared on Wikipedia.

Editors on Wikipedia have repeatedly added smears about Fox News pundit and journalist Tucker Carlson to the site since his show became a major voice supporting President Donald Trump. This has included attacks over his criticism of the Russiagate collusion narrative, his comments about immigration, his use of “Chinese coronavirus” to refer to the current pandemic, and even trying to minimize a violently threatening Antifa “protest” outside his house where his wife was alone at night.

Since the death of George Floyd in police custody in late May, Wikipedia has been subject to a wide-ranging campaign by left-wing editors favorable to the Black Lives Matter movement with encouragement from the Wikimedia Foundation, which owns the site. Articles have been regularly stripped of material detrimental to the movement and the site’s front page used as a platform for messages favorable to their cause and harmful to President Donald Trump.

After radio host Mark Levin criticized the “police-state tactics” of the Obama Administration in its use of intercepts and FISA warrants in 2017, editors on Wikipedia began to attack Levin’s credibility through edits to his page on the site. The criticism, which allegedly prompted President Donald Trump’s controversial wire-tapping allegations, has since been vindicated by revelations about widespread falsehoods in FISA warrants issued against Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, seen now as part of a broader Obamagate scandal. A number of attacks on Levin eventually ended up in news articles shortly before and after the premiere of his show on Fox News.

Conservative black activist Candace Owens has been subject to a prolonged smear campaign on Wikipedia since expressing her support for President Donald Trump. Many of the edits made to her page have selectively quoted or misrepresented Owens to portray her negatively. This included recent comments she made criticizing attempts to minimize the criminal past of George Floyd in the wake of his death in police custody.

An article in the Intercept last week reported that a Wikipedia editor was scrubbing the page of former Democratic Presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), considered a prominent member of the shortlist to be Joe Biden’s Vice Presidental pick. The piece mentioned changes such as removing a past campaign finance scandal and Harris’ record as a hard-line prosecutor. Changes not mentioned include removals of the alleged role nepotism played in her early political career and significant favorable additions about Harris.

Wikipedia editors have censored the page about the police-involved shooting of Rayshard Brooks by removing any mention of Brooks’ violent criminal history, despite him violently resisting arrest which precipitated police use of force. Criticism of District Attorney Paul Howard’s decision to charge officer Garrett Rolfe with felony murder has also been removed.

Last month Wikipedia’s Arbitration Committee, often likened to a Supreme Court, sanctioned a member of the Board of Trustees for the Wikimedia Foundation, which owns the site. The board member, Dr. James Heilman, was barred from edits related to drug pricing in medical articles following disputes with other Wikipedia editors about the propriety of such edits. Heilman, an ER doctor, argued for the inclusion of drug prices in articles and accused the American drug industry of seeking to conceal such details.

Throughout June, Wikipedia activists have been conducting an “edit-a-thon” started by a newly-established Black Lives Matter group on the site, creating large amounts of content on “racial justice” issues. Among their efforts, editors have got numerous articles on racism or alleged police brutality to appear on the front page with several articles having already been featured, including one smearing President Donald Trump and one promoting a book pushing “white guilt” on readers.

After riots over the death of George Floyd in police custody prompted renewed attention to the violent far-left group Antifa, editors on Wikipedia sought to keep out or minimize any mention of Antifa’s involvement in rioting as part of the group’s page on the site. Material about past Antifa violence was also removed and an effort has been made to soften or remove the description of Antifa as a far-left militant group.

A late 2018 analysis by a Wikipedia editor, banned from the site at the time due to criticism of political bias, showed left-wing British outlet the Guardian was the third most-cited news source on the online encyclopedia after the New York Times and the BBC, in many cases to make negative claims about President  Donald Trump and other conservatives. Most of the top-cited news sources on Wikipedia are establishment left-leaning news outlets. Conservative outlets are disfavored by Wikipedia editors who cite the site’s standards for “reliable sources” with some outlets, including Breitbart, formally banned.

The Wikimedia Foundation, which owns Wikipedia, last Wednesday joined the chorus of companies organizations supporting the Black Lives Matter movement following the police-involved death of George Floyd. In its announcement, the Foundation stated there was “no neutral stance” on racial justice. They further committed to making Wikipedia and other Foundation-owned sites more “inclusive” through measures such as a  “universal code of conduct” the Foundation Board recently demanded.

The Wikimedia Foundation, which owns Wikipedia, recently announced that it will impose a “universal code of conduct” on the site and others owned by the Foundation to make them “safe spaces” and improve the “diversity” of the community. The move comes a year after the Foundation took the unprecedented step of banning a veteran administrator, breaching the traditionally self-governing nature of Wikipedia’s community and sparking a revolt that ultimately saw the ban overturned.

Left-wing Wikipedia editors are using articles about the police-involved death of George Floyd and subsequent protests to attack President Donald Trump, including creating individual articles attacking his statements and actions to get them on Wikipedia’s front page. Editors have unduly favored comments criticizing Trump or America, even uncritically repeating attacks from authoritarian governments such as China and Iran, and emphasized police violence over violence from protestors, including Antifa. Such efforts have extended to pushing claims of “far-right” involvement.

Even as the criticism of Wikipedia’s left-wing political bias intensifies, including from the site’s co-founder Larry Sanger, the major tech platforms continue to use the online encyclopedia in their services and rely on it as a model for addressing “fake news” concerns. Rather than improving their services, the integration of Wikipedia into Big Tech platforms has, instead, made them disseminate false or biased information.

Larry Sanger, the co-founder of Wikipedia, published a blog post this month declaring that the online encyclopedia’s “neutral point of view” policy is “dead” due to the rampant left-wing bias of the site. Noting the article on President Donald Trump, Sanger contrasted its extensive coverage of presidential scandals with the largely scandal-free article on former President Barack Obama.

Researchers found in a 2017 study that edits to Wikipedia about scientific subjects influenced the content of scientific literature and what studies would be cited in papers based on their usage on the “online encyclopedia.” Last year, another study found edits about Spanish cities had a measurable impact on tourist activity and an earlier study found investor sentiment could also be influenced. In the case of scientific research, the results showed that the creation of one Wikipedia page influenced up to 250 scientific papers.