Wikipedia to "fight fake news"

Because no one else is doing it--not even the media.
User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4619
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1156 times
Been thanked: 1848 times

Wikipedia to "fight fake news"

Post by ericbarbour » Tue Apr 25, 2017 12:12 am

Oh, the richness and fullness of the guffaw:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... ibune-site

OF COURSE Jimbo's latest stupid idea was first reported in the newspaper that has him on its Board of Directors. Of course.

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39695767
Other advisors to the scheme include:

Silicon Valley venture capitalist Guy Kawasaki
Journalism lecturer Prof Jeff Jarvis
US law professor Larry Lessig
Model/actress Lily Cole
:lol: OF COURSE the "advisors" are all FOJs. Of course.

He THINKS he is going to crowdfund enough money to hire journalists. And I predict that, in the unlikely event that Wikitribune actually raises enough funds to operate, he will put the journalists to work -- with the same gang of lying, abusive, irrational shitheads that he put in charge of Wikipedia. In advance, I state that I feel genuinely sorry for whomever finds themselves "paired" with a fucknozzle like David Gerard, JzG, MONGO, NYB, or SlimVirgin. They will probably force everyone to sign restrictive NDAs, so we will never see the ensuing dumpster fires......

But then this is just bullshit anyway. I highly doubt this will succeed. If you wish to place bets on whether Wikitribune will last more than one year, do so in private. The ensuing lulz must be "all natural". All you have to say is "Wikinews" and doubts are instantly created--because Wikinews is a pathetic failure.....

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4619
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1156 times
Been thanked: 1848 times

Re: Wikipedia to "fight fake news"

Post by ericbarbour » Tue Apr 25, 2017 12:33 am

The WitchStinker started a WO thread:
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... f=6&t=8304

Also linked to a Reddit thread that is drawing criticism already
https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comme ... _with_new/

User avatar
Flip Flopped
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 564
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 3:38 am
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Wikipedia to "fight fake news"

Post by Flip Flopped » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:41 pm

Trout at WO noticed that Wales is leaving the Guardian's board to start Wikitribune.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4619
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1156 times
Been thanked: 1848 times

Re: Wikipedia to "fight fake news"

Post by ericbarbour » Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:50 pm

Flip Flopped wrote:Trout at WO noticed that Wales is leaving the Guardian's board to start Wikitribune.

That thread was deleted.....might have been merged into the main thread, can't tell
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... f=6&t=8304
Not a good thread. They fail to properly discuss the people chosen to run the thing as rabid "FOJs". They failed to discuss Larry Lessig, the ultimate insider for "free internet" things. I suspect they begged Vigilant to come back, but as usual he's not offering any useful added info or analysis, just his usual kneejerking.

Just by the by: The Mighty Wales held a Reddit AMA this morning. As usual it attracted some traffic, and was heavily censored. That guy really doesn't like to criticized.....
https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/ ... s_of_this/

Someone said:
I simply cant belief that. How do you get people without an agenda, people that are willing to be neutral journalists?

Even sites like "Snopes" or "Politifact" have had instances where they obviously lied or tried to push an agenda. I have seen the editing-wars on Wikipedia on politically charged topics.

Why should I trust WikiTribune?

(Some examples: https://i.redd.it/0s5uj7ks73tx.jpg or https://i.redd.it/b7dke6mo18iy.jpg )


And Jimbo responded
It's this level of cynicism that I see as rampant these days, but I think it's not necessary or wise.

Because of course he'd say that. Because Wikipedia suffers from rampant bias in various areas and he dares not admit it publicly. He is obliged to deny everything.

Amazingly, someone managed to talk JEEMBOO into resigning from Guardian's board in order to start Wikitribune, because COI. I suspect he got a LOT of static about that.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/201 ... -conflict/

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4619
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1156 times
Been thanked: 1848 times

Re: Wikipedia to "fight fake news"

Post by ericbarbour » Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:45 pm

Almost six months later:

The WO thread is still being updated, although there's not much actual news being reported.

Wikitribune.com now claims 11,607 "supporters". But is still a blank site with no content, just high-sounding blather about the "mission".

And the same old list of "advisors"; Jimbo, Orit Kopel, Guy Kawasaki (also a WMF Trustee), Jeff Jarvis, Lily Cole (gaaag blechh), and Larry Lessig.
Qualified human rights lawyer, Orit is CEO of the Jimmy Wales Foundation for Freedom of Expression, advocating for bloggers and social media users who are persecuted for speaking out. She also acted as Jimmy’s Special Adviser for Google’s Expert Advisory Council on the ‘Right To Be Forgotten’, defending internet freedom.

The FAQ is comical in its uselessness.
https://www.wikitribune.com/faqs-legal/

Jimbooboo is a regular nonprofit foundation shit factory by now. Do we have the right to forget him??

User avatar
Flip Flopped
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 564
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 3:38 am
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Wikipedia to "fight fake news"

Post by Flip Flopped » Thu Oct 05, 2017 1:29 am

Kawasaki is really a useless Wales attachment at this point. I've never understood Lessing either.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4619
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1156 times
Been thanked: 1848 times

Re: Wikipedia to "fight fake news"

Post by ericbarbour » Fri Oct 13, 2017 1:11 am

Flip Flopped wrote:Kawasaki is really a useless Wales attachment at this point. I've never understood Lessing either.

From the book wiki's Berkman Center article, in the "Faculty" section:
"Yochai Benkler ("Berkman Professor of Entrepreneurial Legal Studies" at Harvard, has spoken at Wikimania many times) [4] Quote: "The author of The Wealth of Networks, Benkler said he had been studying Wikipedia since it was four months old." Benkler was one of Wikipedia's first cheerleaders and apologists, having mentioned it favorably in his infamous 2002 Yale Law Review article Coase's Penguin.
"William "Terry" Fisher (Harvard Law, major reformer of copyright law, wants the government to pay content creators out of taxes and let everyone download everything for free, completely nuts if you ask me)
"Urs Gasser (Berkman executive director, very well-connected law professor in the Internet area)
"Lawrence Lessig (the most "connected" guy on any of these lists, cofounded the Stanford equivalent of the Berkman Center, and Creative Commons -- knows everyone)
"Charles Nesson (Harvard Law, takes notorious cases, edited his own Wikipedia bio [5])
"John Palfrey (Harvard Law, anti-censorship extremist and close friend of Lessig, coauthored a really stupid book with Gasser, was quoted in the NY Times "I would use Wikipedia. I think it's a fabulous, fabulous place to turn. Because some of the information is absolutely credible and really useful.")
"Jonathan Zittrain (Harvard CS prof, went to Yale AND Harvard, cofounded "Chilling Effects" with Wendy Seltzer, also on the boards of the EFF and Internet Society, almost as well-connected as Lessig..... "Wikipedia—with the cooperation of many Wikipedians—has developed a system of self-governance that has many indicia of the rule of law without heavy reliance on outside authority or boundary." Such a smart guy, yet so clueless.)"

From the Creative Commons article:
In December 2001, prominent law professors Larry Lessig, Hal Abelson, Michael Carroll, and attorney Eric Saltzman helped start a nonprofit dedicated to developing and supporting free licenses for intellectual creations that would normally be subject to copyright laws. It was called Creative Commons. They, and secretary Diane Cabell, had known each other from membership in organizations that preceded CC, such as Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet & Society, and Stanford's Center for Internet and Society.

In March 2006, Jimmy Wales joined the Board of Directors of Creative Commons.

In November 2006, three things happened.

November 2: Google donated $30,000 to the Creative Commons group.
November 13: Google bought YouTube for US$1.65 billion.
November 28: Google announced a gift of $2m to the Stanford Center for Internet and Society, which was founded by, um, Larry Lessig.

In May 2007, Google co-founder Sergey Brin married Susan Wojcicki's sister Anne.

In April 2008, this announcement verified what many had already suspected: Google and CC were already working closely together.

In July 2008, the Board of Directors of Creative Commons offered a Board position to a high-school teacher from Palo Alto. Her name: Esther Wojcicki. Yes, her daughters are Susan and Anne. Esther does not seem to have any substantial experience in IT or in copyright law. She taught journalism to high-school kids for 25 years.

In April 2009, Wikipedia began changing its content license from the old GPL to a Creative Commons license.

That same month, Esther became the Chair of the Board of Creative Commons.

In July 2009, CC announced yet another "special arrangement" with Google.

In August 2009, the Brin-Wojcicki Foundation gave Creative Commons $500,000.

In February 2010, Google Inc. gave the Wikimedia Foundation $2 million.

In 2011, Robert Levine published his book Free Ride: How the Internet is Destroying the Culture Business. In which he repeatedly accuses major websites like Google and Yahoo of lobbying and pushing to weaken copyright laws, because major Web firms benefit from free content. Supported by their apologists, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Creative Commons. A major violator of traditional copyright was pointed at: YouTube, owned by Google.

In November 2011, the Brin-Wojcicki Foundation gave the Wikimedia Foundation $500,000.

In December 2011, an open letter was sent to Congress demanding that the SOPA and PIPA bills be killed. Among the signatories: Creative Commons board members Caterina Fake and Jimmy Wales, Sergey Brin, and a mixed bag of Web billionaires. That same day, Creative Commons and the Electronic Frontier Foundation ran an item calling for protests against SOPA.

18 January 2012, Wikipedia displayed a black screen, with a warning about SOPA and PIPA, instead of its usual content. Reddit, Digg and some other popular websites followed suit. An explosion of rage followed. Millions of angry messages were sent to Congresspeople, and SOPA and PIPA died in committee. (The vote on Wikipedia about having this protest was heavily sockpuppeted.) Extensive media coverage. See Blackout (January 2012).

July 2012: Kat Walsh (one of Wikipedia's deepest insiders) became legal counsel for Creative Commons. Her long connections to Jimbo and company paid off.

Look at the present board of Creative Commons. It includes a lot of people from the Hewlett Foundation and the MacArthur Foundation (both of which help to fund CC), Stanford Law, Harvard Law, the MIT Media Lab, etc. etc. Plus Caterina Fake, one of the co-founders of Flickr. And a former Google product developer. Plus Joi Ito, who has messed with Wikipedia biographies many times, including his own. A majority of the board members have degrees or teaching experience at either Harvard, Stanford or MIT, or connections to other major nonprofit organizations. Typical of the board of an "important" nonprofit. Jimbo is one of the few that doesn't fit the profile -- except for being the Sole Flounder of Wikipedia.

From the Brad Patrick article:
August 4, 2006 Speech by Jimmy about how they met.

About few months ago, in September 2005, I got one of these goofy emails. It said: I'd be very interested to speak with you about your ideas and how they interact with certain ideas of mine. It would be a pleasure to meet you and have a bite to eat. And this was from this character here, which is Brad. And then, you know, it's very dangerous to have lunch with me, because the next thing, you know, you might end up with a job. So, this was Brad on his first day at work.
Brad: The part that Jimmy failed to mention about the email, was that I believe the email was dated in August of last year [i.e. August 2005]. What I did was invite him to lunch and I found out ... My path to Wikipedia was very simple. A year ago when Jimmy was giving his talk on ten things that should be free and I read in on the Lessig blog, which I have been reading religiously for a very long time. And I said, you know, I wonder where this foundation is. I have no idea, I thought, in San Francisco maybe, somewhere. And I looked and I see it's in Saint Pete, Florida, which is twenty minutes from where I live. I thought, not in my backyard. I need to go and meet this guy, and I need to find out who their lawyer is and I want to be their lawyer. So, in October, Jimmy emails me and says: so, can you call the office and we can set up a lunch date. August, October, so ... in December, we got together and had lunch [laughter].

Emphasis added. Okay?

User avatar
Strelnikov
Sucks Admin
Posts: 1043
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2017 11:25 pm
Has thanked: 396 times
Been thanked: 253 times

Re: Wikipedia to "fight fake news"

Post by Strelnikov » Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:24 pm

And The Outline is late to the story: "WikiTribune is already biased".
Still "Globally Banned" on Wikipedia for the high crime of journalism.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4619
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1156 times
Been thanked: 1848 times

Re: Wikipedia to "fight fake news"

Post by ericbarbour » Wed Nov 08, 2017 9:51 pm

I admire what Wales is trying to do here. I believe Wikipedia is an incredible use of the internet and the fact that such an extensive encyclopedia exists and is somewhat global and also free should be admitted into evidence when the aliens come to pass judgment on whether humans should join the galactic alliance. But WikiTribune is bullshit. It’s not new — it is the same kind of news aggregation that exists all over the web. It is not better — comparable summarizing and linking can be found on many websites, while original reporting of those same stories, often supplemented by linking to other reporting, can be found at CNN, Reuters, The New York Times, and the BBC, which WikiTribune uses as its primary sources. And finally, and most importantly, it is not neutral. The existence of the “Editor’s choice” module, which highlights some stories over others, is not neutral; neither is the “Good reads” section, which does the same thing. The Manafort story includes a section, “Highlights from the indictment,” which is not neutral — someone had to decide which parts of the indictment were more significant than others. There is no such thing as an objective highlight. It is true that the wording of the story does not include adjectives, except when it quotes from the indictment (“lavish lifestyle,” “false and misleading statements”), but this is standard newswriting, as one would get from the AP or the New York Times.

Lol. Also, yes they finally (!) started to post original content, first item being dated 27 October (?) but not made public until 30 October.

Most of said content to date is written by only two people:

*Peter Bale, an actual journalist; and
*Fiona Apps, aka bizarre Wikipedia administrator and Richard "Chase me ladies" Symonds partner Panyd. She is now an "Outreach Coordinator" for Wikimedia UK. Presumably her self-admitted schizophrenia is under control by now. She ran for Arbcom in December 2011 and failed. Her RFAs were very, very funny.

User avatar
zordrac
Sucks
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2017 9:03 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 16 times

Re: Wikipedia to "fight fake news"

Post by zordrac » Mon Feb 05, 2018 3:18 am

But isn't Wikipedia the single greatest source of fake news on the planet? You have to wonder what they are playing at. Nobody honestly believes that Wikipedia are telling the truth, do they?

Post Reply