hyatt wrote:While researching everyone's favorite Wikipedia controversy I noticed that Zack Exley, who co-founded the Democratic Party's New Organizing Institute, oversaw a large expansion of the Wikimedia Foundation staff. How many of these new hires were from Exley's group of PR operatives? This could explain Wikipedia's political bias problem.
Some of it possibly. Not all -- the leftist, pro-libertarian, pro-Israel and other biases date back to the early 2000s and depend on the content being discussed. Remember that MONGO is still in there reverting vandalism (despite not being an admin anymore) and watching his precious articles about 9/11 conspiracies and national parks. He's about as right-wing as Wikipedia gets. Once you bullshit your way into the "club" it's for life. Like the Mob.
Does anyone remember the Timothy Sandole/Stanton Foundation scandal from 2014?
Exley was slightly involved in that ugly mess--which was almost totally ignored by the media.
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... =23&t=4229
Exley was also partly involved in the SOPA blackout of 2012.
From the "paid editing" part of the book wiki:
WMF fundraising officer, Zach Exley, operates a company called "New Organizing Institute" on the side. New Organizing Institute has a Wikipedia article. Which was written by an undeclared SPA called "Mstemp" in 2011, which did nothing else on Wikipedia. Exley's partner Judith Freeman also edited the institute's article. Freeman's own Wikipedia article was also created by an undeclared SPA, "Carteroni". Exley created his own Wikipedia bio in 2006, long before the WMF hired him in 2010. Exley's dodgy history as a Democratic political operative (he was the creator of the misleading parody website gwbush.com, before the 2004 Presidential election, which was accused of being a dirty trick by Republicans) is not mentioned in any Wikimedia Foundation materials, only in Exley's Wikipedia bio.