Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by miguelazo 1234 days ago
There's also tons of censorship on Wikipedia based on nothing but ideology. Just look at how the Grayzone can no longer be used as a source, based on claims it is "state-affiliated" media, despite ZERO evidence after literally years of such BS claims and now documented evidence of Western states targeting them (look up the exposé on Paul Mason) because they report inconvenient facts about what the security state is doing. There are many more lower-profile harassment campaigns carried out by "editors" looking to smear intellectuals (especially on the left) so that they can't get speaking gigs, print articles in major media, etc. Jimmy Wales himself went after the Grayzone. https://thegrayzone.com/2020/06/11/meet-wikipedias-ayn-rand-...
3 comments

A group calling themselves "Guerilla Skeptics" have worked to bias Wikipedia against what they consider badthought. E.g. they deleted the page of a certain author because they feel he's a kook. (Granted, he is pretty kooky by some standards, but that's not the point, eh? He's still on in Germany though if you're curious. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_R._Hawkins the point is that in English WP he's been erased (not to say "cancelled", eh?) not because he's not notable, but because his work offends a fringe group of fanatics.)

https://www.wired.com/story/guerrilla-wikipedia-editors-who-...

What state is Grayzone supposedly affiliated with? And what of Bellingcat, I have heard it's state affiliated. Is it an accepted source? What determines state affiliation? This kind of stuff has soured me tremendously on Wikipedia. Post it all and let me sort out I say.
They are all Kremlin (or previously Assad) assets, according to groups like Bellingcat, for which there is plenty of hard evidence of state control/funding.
Yes, the problem with Wikipedia is that it doesn't allow enough fringe, pro-violence conspiracy theorists! Nailed it!
That's an amazing take, since Grayzone is very explicitly anti-war, and one of the very few US publications taking an active stand against US proxy wars. If anyone is a pro-violence conspiracy theorist, it is the "paper of record" (NYT), which has actively supported/facilitated virtually every gruesome military intervention of the US for well over a century.