Mark Dice

[badmachine]

Mark Dice put out an episode today on his YouTube channel on wikipedia. its not bad imo.

0:00
Wikipedia was launched in 2001 as an
0:02
online encyclopedia that crowdsourced
0:05
its articles by allowing anyone to write
0:07
and edit them a strange business model
0:09
that has surprisingly led to them
0:10
becoming the fifth most popular website
0:13
in the world its name derives from the
0:15
words Wiki which is a website format
0:17
that allows collaborative modifications
0:19
and encyclopedia they currently have
0:21
over 5 million articles and are usually
0:24
one of the top Google search results for
0:26
most subjects entered into the search
0:28
engine unlike traditional encyclopedias
0:30
which are written and edited by experts
0:33
in their field pretty much anyone can
0:35
add almost anything to Wikipedia
0:37
articles which are then read and
0:39
believed by countless people online
0:41
since Wikipedia has become the most
0:44
popular online encyclopedia and one of
0:47
the most visited websites in the world
0:48
people need to know about what a serious
0:51
problem Wikipedia is and how it's a huge
0:53
part of the fake news industrial complex
0:55
editors at most newspapers and
0:57
traditional encyclopedia companies have
0:59
names and titles not to mention bosses
1:02
and company policies that they must
1:04
abide by but much of what happens on
1:07
Wikipedia is a mystery and most of the
1:10
editors and writers are Anonymous or
1:12
only referred to by their online handles
1:14
which rarely reveal any information
1:16
about who they are or what credentials
1:18
they have if any since Wikipedia is free
1:21
and there are no advertisements on the
1:23
site this leads to the question of who
1:25
funds them and how do they free online
1:28
encyclopedia that was written by random
1:30
Anonymous people on the internet come to
1:32
be a trusted source of information by so
1:35
many people I'll get into all that and
1:36
more but first real quick subscribe to
1:38
my channel if you're new here because
1:39
you're not going to find information and
1:40
an analysis like this anywhere else
1:43
online the parent company the wicked
1:45
media Foundation employs over 700 people
1:47
many of them contractors and they
1:49
started off with about fifty thousand
1:51
dollars in Assets in 2004 which grew
1:54
over 50 million dollars by 2014 to over
1:58
230 million million dollars in assets
2:01
today where does all this money come
2:03
from and what are they doing with it
2:05
since the articles are written and
2:06
edited by random volunteers on the
2:09
internet who have too much time on their
2:10
hands apparently people just give them
2:13
money a lot of money in 2008 they got
2:17
their biggest donation to date which was
2:18
three million dollars from the Alfred P
2:21
Sloan Foundation a philanthropic
2:23
non-profit organization founded by the
2:26
former CEO of General Motors they would
2:28
later give Millions more Google has also
2:30
given millions of dollars to them as
2:32
well so it's no wonder that Wikipedia
2:34
articles are usually one of the top
2:36
search results for just about anything
2:38
Google's co-founder Sergey Brin has
2:41
given them hundreds of thousands of
2:42
dollars of his own personal money on top
2:44
of the money that Google gave them as
2:46
Corporation all these donations are tax
2:49
deductible because they're registered as
2:51
a non-profit organization a non-profit
2:55
organization worth 230 million dollars
2:58
Wikipedia has been involved in numerous
3:00
lawsuits over defamation and a
3:02
substantial amount of their money has
3:04
been spent defending them it seems those
3:06
are worthwhile tax write-offs and a
3:08
necessary part of doing business as a
3:10
disinformation website articles about
3:12
controversial subjects like global
3:14
warming illegal immigration and abortion
3:16
all have massive liberal bias and
3:19
entries about living people particularly
3:21
conservative authors and journalists and
3:23
activists are the most biased and
3:25
defamatory on the entire website because
3:27
Wikipedia has become the go-to place for
3:29
most people when they want to look
3:31
something up major corporations use sock
3:34
puppet accounts to edit pages about
3:35
their companies and products trying to
3:37
paint them in a favorable light and
3:40
scrub criticism such edits have been
3:42
traced back to people at companies like
3:44
Pepsi Sea World Walmart Exxon Mobil and
3:47
others since no company wants negative
3:49
information about them or their products
3:51
on an encyclopedia article about them in
3:54
2012 it was discovered that two
3:57
employees of Wikipedia's parent company
3:59
then Wikimedia Foundation also ran a
4:02
public relations business which included
4:04
editing and monitoring the Wikipedia
4:06
pages of their clients and in 2015 it
4:09
was revealed that some Wikipedia editors
4:11
had been running a coordinated blackmail
4:13
and extortion racket by using their
4:16
editorial powers to allow the defamation
4:18
of public figures and businesses if they
4:20
didn't pay them protection money these
4:23
editors would also contact businesses
4:25
and lesser-known celebrities whose pages
4:28
had been rejected due to lacking
4:29
notoriety and tell them that they would
4:31
repost the page if they paid them they
4:34
also demanded monthly payments from the
4:36
people to protect their pages from
4:38
having unflattering information added
4:41
pages of popular conservatives often
4:43
have large controversies sections which
4:45
contain long lists of every little thing
4:48
they've said that liberals find
4:49
objectionable or want to amplify Pages
4:52
for Ann Coulter Sean Hanley Rush
4:54
Limbaugh and Michael Savage all have the
4:56
controversy section or the equivalent
4:59
which no nitpick things they've said or
5:01
done Wikipedia has even been known to
5:04
use unflattering photos of conservatives
5:06
in their profiles conversely there are
5:08
relatively few liberal journalists or
5:10
television pundits who have controversy
5:12
section in their articles or have much
5:14
negative information about them even
5:16
mentioned at all for example there is no
5:19
mention on msnbc's Lawrence O'Donnell's
5:21
page about his conspiracy theories about
5:23
President Trump which got so outrageous
5:25
that he even claimed Vladimir Putin
5:28
orchestrated the false flag attack in
5:29
Syria using chemical weapons to help
5:32
president Trump's approval ratings
5:34
there's not a single mention on Michael
5:36
Moore's page or congresswoman Maxine
5:38
Waters page about their endless Russian
5:41
conspiracy theories either you may
5:43
recall that Maxine Waters even claims
5:45
among other strange things that Russia
5:48
coined the term crooked Hillary for
5:50
Donald Trump transgender TV star Laverne
5:53
Cox was born Roderick Cox a man but
5:56
Wikipedia editors refused to allow his
5:58
birth name to be mentioned in anywhere
6:00
on his page Roderick was the first
6:02
transgender person to appear on the
6:04
cover of Time Magazine and is hail the
6:06
hero in the Liber media but unlike every
6:09
single other actor or actress on the
6:10
planet who uses a stage name or legally
6:13
changes their name Wikipedia will not
6:16
allow any mention of the fact that
6:18
Laverne Cox was born Roderick Cox many
6:22
of Hollywood's biggest stars use stage
6:25
names and well never mentioned in the
6:26
traditional media their real names are
6:29
always included on their Wikipedia page
6:31
except for Laverne's Tom Cruise's real
6:35
name is Tom apifer Nicholas Cage's real
6:37
name is Nicholas Coppola singer Katy
6:40
Perry's name is Katie Hudson there's a
6:43
million of them and every other
6:45
cisgender celebrity has their real name
6:48
included on Wikipedia But the site gives
6:50
special treatment to Laverne Cox and
6:53
other transgender people including Jazz
6:56
Jennings which is a pseudonym not just
6:58
Jazz but also so Jennings the star of
7:01
the TLC reality show which promoted Jazz
7:04
as one of the youngest children ever to
7:06
identify as transgender liberal
7:09
political figures also get special
7:10
treatment on Wikipedia by the editors
7:12
who carefully guard their Pages trying
7:14
to keep them portrayed in a positive
7:16
light one investigation revealed that a
7:19
single Wikipedia editor made over 2 000
7:22
changes to Hillary Clinton's page over a
7:24
10-year period from 2006 up until the
7:28
time she announced she was running for
7:29
president in 2016 in order to keep as
7:32
much criticism off of it as possible the
7:35
Wikipedia page for USA today's founding
7:38
editor John siegenthaler Senior had once
7:40
claimed that he was directly involved in
7:42
the assassinations of John F Kennedy and
7:44
his brother Bobby the edit was made as a
7:46
joke by someone but it stayed up and
7:48
when he learned of it he contacted Jimmy
7:51
Wales the founder of Wikipedia But at
7:53
first The Only Thing Wikipedia did is
7:56
correct the spelling of a word in the
7:59
entry tree and the false claims stayed
8:01
on the website for four months before it
8:04
was finally removed but not before the
8:06
claims had been repeated on other
8:08
websites a Turkish academic who traveled
8:10
to Canada was reportedly detained
8:12
several hours by immigration officials
8:13
because of a false claim someone added
8:16
to his Wikipedia page pro golfer fuzzy
8:19
Zeller who once won the US Open and the
8:21
Masters Tournament sued Wikipedia after
8:23
somebody edited his page to say that he
8:25
beat his wife and abused drugs
8:27
allegations which were then picked up by
8:29
other websites just a few days before a
8:31
congressional midterm election someone
8:33
changed the page of then House of
8:35
Representatives minority leader Tom
8:37
DeLay to say that he was a grand Dragon
8:40
of the Republican Party a reference to
8:42
the title of the leader of the KKK the
8:45
IP address of the person who changed it
8:47
was traced back to someone who
8:49
reportedly worked for the New York Times
8:50
people have even changed the pages of
8:53
celebrities to indicate that they have
8:54
died as a joke which has sometimes
8:57
caused the fake news to spread far and
8:59
wide across the internet a sociology
9:01
student actually added a fake quote to
9:03
the Wikipedia page of French composer
9:05
Maurice Jarre immediately after his
9:08
death as an experiment to see if media
9:11
Outlets would pick it up in their
9:12
obituaries and many did one study that
9:16
measured how many people viewed pages
9:18
that were vandalized with false
9:20
information found that while 42 percent
9:22
of the damage was repaired almost
9:24
immediately the majority of the edits
9:26
which were not quickly corrected were
9:28
viewed hundreds of millions of times
9:31
before the Articles had been fixed
9:32
sometimes Wikipedia editors will even
9:34
create an entire article about a topic
9:36
or an issue hoping to shine a spotlight
9:37
on it to further promote their political
9:40
leanings for example there was a lengthy
9:42
article titled the criticism of George W
9:44
bush but the criticism of Barack Obama
9:47
page had been deleted four different
9:49
times by Wikipedia editors who kept
9:52
claiming the article had no meaningful
9:54
substantive content and called it an
9:57
attack page after the edit Wars
10:00
continued the site finally allowed the
10:03
criticism of Barack Obama page to stay
10:05
but renamed it to the public image of
10:09
Obama and of course Obama's main page is
10:12
mostly praise the article about the
10:15
United States presidential election of
10:17
2016 highlights liberals conspiracy
10:19
theories about Russian interference
10:22
saying on Donald Trump's page in the
10:24
section about his campaign for president
10:26
it claims the alt-right movement
10:29
coalesced around Trump's candidacy and
10:32
during the campaign Trump was accused of
10:34
pandering to White nationalists and
10:37
fact-checking organizations have
10:39
denounced Trump for making a record
10:41
number of false statements compared to
10:43
other candidates there is even an
10:46
article about what Wikipedia claims is
10:48
the LGBT grooming conspiracy theory
10:52
which tries to frame the countless
10:54
instances of grooming activities which
10:56
have been making the news over the last
10:57
few years by LGBT extremist in schools
11:00
drag shows for kids as if they're just
11:03
normal behaviors in anyone who sees a
11:06
problem with it is a right-wing
11:08
extremist and a conspiracy theorist as
11:11
you know white heterosexual Christian
11:13
men are usually demonized as the cause
11:15
of every evil in the world by the
11:17
liberal media today white people are
11:19
held in such disdain that they are often
11:21
told that they should be ashamed of
11:23
being white and if they have any measure
11:24
of success in life it's because they
11:26
have white privilege which is said to be
11:28
the primary reason for it meaning they
11:31
benefit from what liberals call an
11:33
inherent white supremacist ideology
11:35
incorporated into American society and
11:38
institutions white people are being cast
11:40
in such a Negative light in the media
11:43
and on college campuses today that if
11:45
any white person happens to be proud of
11:47
their culture then they're painted as
11:49
racist in a white supremacist of course
11:52
every other race can be happy about who
11:53
they are and the achievements of their
11:56
culture except white people a comparison
11:58
between the articles about white pride
12:01
black pride and Asian pride on Wikipedia
12:04
illustrates this double standard for
12:06
example the white pride article states
12:09
that white pride is a motto primarily
12:11
used by white separatists white
12:13
nationalist Neo-Nazi and white
12:16
supremacist organizations in order to
12:18
Signal racist or racialist viewpoints
12:21
compare this to the article on black
12:23
pride which reads black pride is a
12:25
movement in response to dominant white
12:28
cultures and ideologies that encourages
12:30
black people to celebrate Black Culture
12:33
and embrace their African Heritage the
12:37
entry for Asian pride reads that in the
12:39
United States Asian pride is a positive
12:42
stance to being Asian American the
12:45
anti-white bias in the pride articles is
12:49
cultural Marxism which ironically
12:51
Wikipedia calls a conspiracy theory
12:54
cultural Marxism is the use of the media
12:57
to perpetuate leftist ideologies such as
13:00
political correctness gender bending and
13:02
other sexual perversions as if they are
13:05
normal and cool while attacking
13:07
traditional Family Values American
13:09
history and culture along with
13:11
capitalism and the Bill of Rights
13:12
cultural Marxism uses pop culture and
13:15
celebrity icons to promote regressive
13:18
leftist policies and behaviors to the
13:20
masses so people will mimic these
13:22
influencers by thinking their attitudes
13:24
and actions are cool and Wikipedia
13:27
doesn't just call culture Marxism a
13:29
conspiracy theory they call it an
13:32
anti-semitic conspiracy theory and cite
13:35
the Southern Poverty Law Center as the
13:38
source for their claim the fact that
13:40
Wikipedia is the default online
13:42
encyclopedia is horrifying considering
13:45
I've only mentioned a handful of the
13:47
problems the site has and with the
13:50
ability to misinform so many people with
13:53
bias and malicious information it
13:55
shouldn't be considered a reliable
13:57
source of information and should be fund
14:00
and mocked whatever happened to
14:02
Encyclopedia Britannica a real
14:04
encyclopedia if you like my serious
14:07
monologues like this then you love
14:08
reading my books so order the true story
14:10
of fake news how mainstream media
14:12
manipulates millions in paperback from
14:13
Amazon.com or download the ebook from
14:16
Kindle livebooks or Google play my books
14:18
are a lot more in depth and hardcore
14:20
than my videos that chapter toned down a
14:22
bit for obvious reasons so head on over
14:24
to Amazon.com or click the link in the
14:25
description below and check them out
14:31
[Music]

[Bbb23sucks]

Good that WP criticism is getting more attention, but he gives off major right-wing incel lunatic/Ben Shapiro vibes. Probably not the best look for us.

[badmachine]

Good that WP criticism is getting more attention, but he gives off major right-wing incel lunatic/Ben Shapiro vibes. Probably not the best look for us.

he is a conservative Christian with 1.86 million subscribers on youtube. so wikipedia criticism is invalid if it comes from people whose views you dont like?

if i gave a shit about "the best look for us", i wouldnt post at all.

[Ognistysztorm]

Regardless of whether someone is mainstream or not, it is probably better to shift the axis of criticism against Wikipedia to include its community issues, such as how they condoned activities that we normally view as cyber-bullying or harassment.