91–100 of 180 posts
This is McCarthyism. You take a polarizing word, then you attack your enemies by claiming they are that thing, and couch the whole thing in an "investigation" whose outcome is predetermined. There is no merit to discussing if the target is that thing, it doesn't matter. It's an ideological attack. If you take it on its face then the attackers win because you're treating them as if they were honest participants in a d…
Roy Cohn was Trump's mentor after all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably an attempt at capturing Wikipedia, in preparation for censorship or historic revisionism. I feel like a cosnpiracy theorist, but such things seem less implausible these days.
How exactly is that supposed to work?
How it's enforced is a detail. They have the Supreme Court to issue whatever verdict is required.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_genocide
Which calling it that, is of course a huge issue for all the zionist genocide deniers (both liberals and conservatives).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How exactly is that supposed to work?
It's not complicated, same process as has been applied to government agencies and private universities: remove "DEI", that is any mention of anti racism. How it's enforced is a detail. They have the Supreme Court to issue whatever verdict is required.
In fact, the most likely outcome to the House trying to play hardball with Wikipedia is a double-digit percentage increase in their donations. Which I don't think House Republicans mind, because none of this is actually about Wikipedia.
So, again, how is this supposed to work?
This is McCarthyism. You take a polarizing word, then you attack your enemies by claiming they are that thing, and couch the whole thing in an "investigation" whose outcome is predetermined. There is no merit to discussing if the target is that thing, it doesn't matter. It's an ideological attack. If you take it on its face then the attackers win because you're treating them as if they were honest participants in a d…
[flagged]
DOGE wasted billions of dollars and failed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Moving Wikipedia elsewhere will likely have to happen. Thought, the US may respond by blocking Wikipedia content as many regimes in the past have: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Wikipedia
Not to give any ideas, but a likely outcome is a US-based fork that has the offending bias removed, with a "ministry of truth"-y name.
I don’t trust this administration to perform an unbiased investigation, but it’s not a secret that Wikipedia is a high profile target for anyone who wants to push an agenda. Even trivial topics can attract die-hards who refuse to let an article say something they don’t like. Wikipedia also seeks to have a similar problem to StackOverflow where some users have become very good at working their way into the site’s stru…
Should any administration be investigating a private entity for bias? Whether there is bias or not is entirely immaterial! The government should not be the Ministry of Truth!
Biased towards sanity while the government and a significant part of this country is biased in the opposite direction.
No wonder they're afraid.
> 1.Records, communications, or analysis pertaining to possible coordination by nation state actors in editing activities on Wikipedia.
> 2. Records, communications, or analysis pertaining to possible coordination within academic institutions or other organized efforts to edit or influence content identified as possibly violating Wikipedia policies.
> 3. Records of Wikipedia’s Arbitration Committee (ArbCom) including but not limited to all editor conduct disputes and actions taken against them.
> 4. Records showing identifying and unique characteristics of accounts (such as names, IP addresses, registration dates, user activity logs) for editors subject to actions by ArbCom.
> 5. Documentation of Wikipedia’s editorial policies and protocols including those aimed at ensuring neutrality and addressing bias as well as policies regarding discipline for violations.
> 6. Any analysis conducted or reviewed by the Wikimedia Foundation (or by a third-party acting on its behalf) of patterns of manipulation or bias related to antisemitism and conflicts with the State of Israel.
---
IP adress of users who have gotten in trouble with arbcom is quite concerning. That could make people be afraid of contributing to controversial topics in case their IP ends up in US government hands. Definitely a chilling effect.