#WalkAway, DemonRats, Despicability Level:Infinity, Despicable Democrats, Liberalism Is A Disease, Libtardation

The Word For It Is ‘Propaganda’: Wikipedia Co-Founder Says Website Has Morphed Into Playground For Rich And Powerful Manipulators | Hunter Avallone Is Now a Full-Blown Libtard

What’s happened to Wikipedia is analogous to what’s happened to our society. This leftcentric view that we can’t seem to escape from, has been fraudulently represented as the mean value of all societal perspectives, when its not. Not even close. In fact, most of the policies that come from this ideologically perverted contingency of lobbyists and actor-agent scum, are representative the assinine political stances of mostly outlier fringe demographics. Demographics that consist of Atheists, trannies, gays and Satanists and represent a fraction of a fraction of the general population. I actually respect the Satanists more than the Atheists, just because at least they aren’t so willfully ignorant to deny the existence of a God. Even if it’s the “wrong” one.

When it comes down to it, most people don’t think it’s a good idea to let biological men into the women’s bathroom or to allow them to compete in women’s sports. Most people hate the non-stop virtue signaling and the medias neverending instigation of negative race relations via the non-stop “the white man is responsible” campaign that the post-modern left has taken it upon themselves to fuel in perpetuity. The only reason these viewpoints are able to cement and embedd themselves into the most popular sites, like a Wikipedia, is because they were essentially extorted into place by agents from the Zionist political left. They censor anything that might retort their insane ideologies with the application of common sense, and anyone with a dissenting opinion who does gain traction or popularity, will be mercilessly attacked and extorted until they go away or fall in line. You should see some of the threats I get. Lol.

Hunter Avallone is a good example of once sane and rational voice from the right on YouTube who someone got to and was apparently extorted or bought into transforming himself into a full blown libtard. And I mean FULL BLOWN LIBTARD.

The channel “Actual Justice Warrior” is fun to watch. He spends a lot of time very fairly going after The Young Turks(very easy to do). But he’s also called out Hunter Avallone for selling the fuck out in spectacular fashion.

Source: RT.com

The Word For It Is ‘Propaganda’: Wikipedia Co-Founder Says Website Has Morphed Into Playground For Rich And Powerful Manipulators

HAFHAF | July 24, 2021

Wikipedia fails to reflect relevant viewpoints on hot-button topics and describes center-left establishment worldviews, its co-founder Larry Sanger said. This consensus reality is prone to nefarious manipulation by powers that be.

the word for it is ‘propaganda’ wikipedia co founder says website has morphed into playground for rich and powerful manipulators

“There is a big nasty complex game being played behind the scenes to make the articles say what somebody wants them to say,” Sanger said this week, blasting the current community culture at Wikipedia. “There are all kinds of tricks that people can play to ‘win’ it.”

Sanger, who launched – along with Jimmy Wales – the world’s premier website for reference materials, has become a vocal critic of his brainchild. He jokingly called himself “ex-founder,” referring to both his criticism and Wikipedia’s attempts to distance itself from his person.

This week he talked about what he sees as a problematic change in the online encyclopedia to Freddie Sayers, the host of UnHerd magazine’s show Lockdown TV.

Today, Wikipedia is a “pretty reliable establishment in its viewpoint, whatever the viewpoint is,” he said.

This is ironic, he added, considering that the website was founded by “a couple of libertarians, who at least in the beginning were really tolerant and open to all sorts of anti-establishment views being canvassed within the articles.”

The user-edited encyclopedia was supposed to lay out known facts and prominent points of view on how to interpret them. But on “hot-button topics,” whether political or cultural, it is now clearly pushing the viewpoint of the center-left, obfuscating and downplaying the opinions of other groups, Sanger said.

This approach is inherently flawed because it denies people the right to make informed decisions in life.

“We do not want to be led by the nose. We, being free individuals, want to make up our minds. And if we don’t then there is something wrong with us, I think,” he explained.

Of course, there are people who want to be told what they should think by some authority figure, be it a religious leader, party officials or some dictator. And a resource that caters to such urges does a disservice, Sanger argued.

The word for it is ‘propaganda’ when it’s systematic. And that’s what we are really dealing with on Wikipedia.

Such a resource also becomes a useful tool for those who want to manipulate public perceptions of reality to their own benefit.

There is an entire industry that monitors Wikipedia pages relevant to their clients and pushes forward edits on their behalf. Some of it goes under the radar, since Wikipedia editors are not obliged to identify themselves and disclose conflicts of interests.

“If only one version of facts is allowed, then it gives a huge incentive to wealthy and powerful people to seize control over things like Wikipedia in order to shore up their power. And they do that,” Sanger pointed out.

Part of the problem is in Wikipedia’s deliberate reliance on secondary sources, which are mostly media reports, to back article contents. Those sources can be biased themselves, and the Wikipedia editor community grandfathers those biases by excluding some outlets like the Daily Mail or Fox News as valid references. Increasing polarization of the media further exacerbated the problem.

The result is that now, “if a controversy does not appear in the mainstream center-left media, then it’s not going to appear on Wikipedia,” Sanger said.

Joe Biden’s page barely mentions the controversy involving Ukraine and his son Hunter’s sinecure job there, and does so to dismiss it as a manufactured political attack against the incumbent US president.

Sanger believes it is impossible to have an encyclopedia that lists universally accepted facts of life and that honestly reflecting existing divisions and debates is the best thing one can hope for.

“You cannot have an ‘encyclopedia of fact’ if by ‘fact’ you mean something that all responsible researchers on a topic agree to, because it’s often the case that there is disagreement among experts on all kinds of things,” he said.

The problem with ‘consensus reality’ on Wikipedia goes far beyond political issues. Topics like eastern medicine (which the site dismisses as ‘quackery’), Christianity (which Wikipedia describes from a liberal academic point of view) or Covid-19 are all affected by it, Sanger explained. The latter is a good example of how the website joined in with the larger Big Tech drive to silence voices that the establishment deemed undesirable in public discourse.

“There are a lot of Nobel Prize winners, distinguished doctors and so forth, whose views are not only not welcomed on Wikipedia, they are literally censored on YouTube and Facebook and Twitter, where videos of interviews made with such people are removed, because they directly contradict the narrative,” he said.

Silicon Valley censorship is disconcerting, Sanger said, adding that he believes a government-enforced neutrality in online platforms would have been a more chilling alternative, since it would amount to government censorship.

Some might argue that governments simply outsource their censorship to private companies, which are not subject to free speech restrictions like the First Amendment.

This week the White House acknowledged it was flagging “problematic posts for Facebook that spread disinformation.”

Sanger hopes that a drive to decentralize the internet, bringing it closer to the free spirit of the ‘Wild West’ days of the web, would help counter this push to gag dissent.

A few years ago he proposed a ‘Declaration of Digital Independence,’ which would give internet users a set of rights for free speech, privacy and security and would rein in the corporate control of online public spaces.

Source: RT.com

%d bloggers like this: