Who can you trust?

Not Wikipedia

Wikipedia says Wikipedia is Unreliable

Wouldn't it be nice to have an honest encyclopedic resource that we could all trust for the truth about almost everything? That was the idea behind Wikipedia. It was supposed to be a collaborative effort of everyday citizens, where those with competing ideas about the truth could work together online to negotiate and compromise -- to settle on a workable definition of what is true about something.

That's okay for most things on Wikipedia but for anything political and contentious, what shows up on the site depends on the determination and resources of those managing the entries. Agencies of the american government, for example, have the deep pockets and ideological determination required to ensure their picture of the world is the only one Wikipedia users see.

While dissidents have little to no funding (and thus time) to police entries for the truth, propaganda agents can watch for changes and "correct" them at their leisure.

To get a sense of the games going on behind the scenes at Wikipedia, go to a contentious article and click View History in the top right corner. You'll see all the edits made to the webpage and find info about who made the edits. Often, it's a back and forth battle that goes on endlessly.

In addition, the final arbiters of Wikipedia truth are themselves brainwashed brainwashers and thus predisposed to accept the received wisdom of established authority.

Read the Wikipedia entry: Wikipedia: Why Wikipedia is not so Great


 Nazis Wikipedia