Hey, Let's investigate together if their freedom of speech is used correctly.
/s
Meanwhile: Hey EU, regulating our friedly corporate donors, means you harm their freedom of speech !!!!!!!!
House to investigate Wikipedia over allegations of organized bias
11–20 of 180 posts
Re: House to investigate Wikipedia over allegations of organized bias
#12Organized bias like creating a specific page to for a fictional syndrome in order to wave away any criticisms of your opponents. So organized that Wikipedia won’t remove the obvious bs: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_derangement_syndrome One of the many reasons I don’t donate to Wikipedia. To keep this page up is to continue fueling unnecessary culture wars. Which in my opinion doesn’t align with their mission…
I mean it is a "a pejorative term used to describe negative reactions to U.S. President Donald Trump..." How is having a page for that biased. And this is coming from some who has been described in the past (not anymore) of having TDS.
Re: House to investigate Wikipedia over allegations of organized bias
#13good thing wikipedia allows its entire database to be downloaded..... go ahead and change it to your will, we will have the data for a few years later....
Re: House to investigate Wikipedia over allegations of organized bias
#14I don't see the point. Even if there is organized bias, what can Congress legally do about it?
> Even if there is organized bias, what can Congress legally do about it?
Something similar to their targeted of US Univerities/Colledes for anti-semitism and for being "woke." Trump has threatened the Harvard endowment, its ability to enrol foreign students, federal research funding, among others.
Re: House to investigate Wikipedia over allegations of organized bias
#15I don't see the point. Even if there is organized bias, what can Congress legally do about it?
Yeah that'd be a very easy 1A case.
Re: House to investigate Wikipedia over allegations of organized bias
#16I don't see the point. Even if there is organized bias, what can Congress legally do about it?
Legally? As if Republicans care about legality.
Re: House to investigate Wikipedia over allegations of organized bias
#17They should also investigate Google, which often puts Wikipedia article extracts right at the top of the search results. There has been a great deal of misinformation spread this way.
Wikipedia is just the tip of the iceberg. How their biased viewpoints get amplified globally is a huge problem on top of that.
Re: House to investigate Wikipedia over allegations of organized bias
#18I don't see the point. Even if there is organized bias, what can Congress legally do about it?
> Even if there is organized bias, what can Congress legally do about it? Something similar to their targeted of US Univerities/Colledes for anti-semitism and for being "woke." Trump has threatened the Harvard endowment, its ability to enrol foreign students, federal research funding, among others.
Does Wikipedia take any federal funding?
Re: House to investigate Wikipedia over allegations of organized bias
#19Organized bias like creating a specific page to for a fictional syndrome in order to wave away any criticisms of your opponents. So organized that Wikipedia won’t remove the obvious bs: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_derangement_syndrome One of the many reasons I don’t donate to Wikipedia. To keep this page up is to continue fueling unnecessary culture wars. Which in my opinion doesn’t align with their mission…
This page didn't create or popularize the term "Trump derangement syndrome".
So? It maintains it the presence and unhealthy status quo. What is your point? I never declared it created the pejorative.
Re: House to investigate Wikipedia over allegations of organized bias
#20I don't see the point. Even if there is organized bias, what can Congress legally do about it?
> Even if there is organized bias, what can Congress legally do about it? Something similar to their targeted of US Univerities/Colledes for anti-semitism and for being "woke." Trump has threatened the Harvard endowment, its ability to enrol foreign students, federal research funding, among others.
Exactly, more tempest-in-a-teapot spectacle that keeps their supporters cheering for the destruction of the Constitution and individual liberty.