Connect with us

US News

WIKIPEDIA co-founder: Nobody should trust the site!

Freddie Sayers spoke to Larry Sanger about why he left

Published

on

Source: UNHERD

Chances are, if you’ve ever been on the internet, you’ve visited Wikipedia. It is the world’s fifth largest website, pulling in an estimated 6.1 billion followers per month and serves as a cheat sheet for almost any topic in the world. So great is the online encyclopedia’s influence is so great that it is the biggest and “most read reference work in history”, with as many as 56 million editions. 

But the truth about this supposedly neutral purveyor of information is a little more complex. Historically, Wikipedia has been written and monitored by a community of volunteers who collaborated and contested competing claims with one another. In the words of Wikipedia’s co-founder, Larry Sanger who spoke to Freddie Sayers on LockdownTV, these volunteers would “battle it out”. 

This battle of ideas on Wikipedia’s platform formed a crucial part of the encyclopaedia’s commitment to neutrality, which according to Sanger, was abandoned after 2009. In the years since, on issues ranging from Covid to Joe Biden, it has become increasingly partisan, primarily espousing an establishment viewpoint that increasingly represents “propaganda”. This, says Sanger, is why he left the site in 2007, describing it as “broken beyond repair”.

On Wikipedia’s Left-wing bias:

You can’t cite the Daily Mail at all. You can’t cite Fox News on socio-political issues either. It’s banned. So what does that mean? It means that if a controversy does not appear in the mainstream centre-Left media, then it’s not going to appear on Wikipedia. – LARRY SANGER, UNHERD

On COVID-19:

If you look at the articles that Wikipedia has, you can just see how they are simply mouthing the view of the World Economic Council or World Economic Forum, and the World Health Organisation, the CDC and various other establishment mouthpieces like Fauci — they take their cues from them…There’s a global enforcement of a certain point of view, which is amazing to me amazing to a libertarian, or a liberty-loving conservative. – LARRY SANGER, UNHERD

In what ways other than politics does that establishment view come across?

Eastern medicine is basically called quackery in dismissive, quite judgmental, language and so forth. It’s done, apparently without any compunctions at all. Then when it comes to Christianity, the viewpoint on Christianity given is the liberal one that would be found in mainline denominations and liberal Catholicism as opposed to the actual Bible-believing fundamentalist type viewpoint.  – LARRY SANGER, UNHERD

How Wikipedia entries are distorted: 

There are companies like Wiki PR, where paid writers and editors will go in and change articles. Maybe there’s some way to make such a system work, but not if the players who are involved and who are being paid are not identified by name — they actually are supposed to be identified by name and say ‘we represent this firm’ if they are officially registered with some sort of Wikipedia editing firm. But they don’t have to do that. – LARRY SANGER, UNHERD

Why is it happening?

Because there is a lot of influence. Wikipedia is known now by everyone to have a lot of influence in the world. So there’s a very big, nasty, complex game being played behind the scenes to make the article say what somebody wants them to say.  – LARRY SANGER, UNHERD

On the takeover of Big Tech

We trusted outlets like Facebook and Twitter and YouTube with our data, and allowed them essentially to take over the media world. What we trusted them with was our liberty and our privacy, that basically that they weren’t going to shut us down. But they stabbed us in the back, essentially. – LARRY SANGER, UNHERD

Why is neutrality important?

You want the tools to think about an issue…When we are trying to get some basic information in understanding a topic, we do not want to be led by the nose, right? We are free individuals who want to make up our own minds. – LARRY SANGER, UNHERD

Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Local News

Concerns Grow Over Non-Citizen Voting in Arizona

Published

on

Concerns Grow Over Non-Citizen Voting in Arizona

In Arizona, to vote in federal elections (President, the House, and the Senate) you are required to swear (under penalty of perjury) that you are a U.S. citizen…

But there is no proof requirement.

Official Arizona Secretary of State Citizenship Requirements for Voting:

Source: https://azsos.gov/elections/voters/registering-vote/registration-requirements/proof-citizenship-requirements

The federal government relies on the attestation of the individual, the penalties for false statements, and the states’ efforts to cross-check information to maintain the integrity of the voter registration process (Source).

The process is largely based on the honor system.

The Associated Press recently reported this fact:

Source: https://apnews.com/article/arizona-voting-laws-citizenship-proof-50dafd68f8dd4af5cf669afa62efdf19

Currently, there is no national database or system that verifies the citizenship of voters directly. There is no guaranteed audit at the federal level specifically targeting “federal only” voters who have not provided proof of citizenship.

What about election audits? Wouldn’t non-citizen voters get caught?

Non-citizens in the country on parole awaiting an asylum hearing could potentially be identifiable in databases used for post-election audits, such as the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program, which is designed to verify the immigration status of individuals (Source).

As for “gotaway” illegal immigrants who evaded entering in a documented fashion, it would be significantly more challenging to identify them in databases for the purposes of a post-election audit.

Since they have not been processed through official immigration channels, they would not have records in the same databases that document legal entries and immigration statuses. Therefore, they would not be easily identifiable through the standard verification processes used in post-election audits.

I’ve seen studies that claim non-citizen and Illegal Immigrant voting is extremely rare… What about those?

Studies such as those from the Brennan Center for Justice (link), indicate that non-citizen voting is extremely rare based on available data and the significant legal risks involved.

However, these studies rely on the analysis of documented cases and official records, which would not include undocumented individuals who evaded detection entirely.

For “gotaway” illegal immigrants, since they lack official records, there would be no straightforward method to audit their voting activity after an election. This is a limitation of the current verification systems, which are designed to prevent ineligible voting using the records available. The rarity of non-citizen voting cited in studies is based on the assumption that the risk of severe penalties, including deportation and imprisonment, serves as a strong deterrent against such actions.

In summary, while there are robust systems in place to deter and detect ineligible voting, the nature of undocumented entry into the country creates a gap in the ability to audit post-election voting activity for those individuals. The extent to which this occurs is unknown, and the studies available do not account for individuals without any official records.

All things considered, voting is only a small fraction of the overall concerns that Americans are expressing related to illegal immigration and asylum into the United States.

Gallup recently reported:

Quote from Gallup:

“For the third month in a row, immigration is the problem Americans name more than any other as the most important facing the U.S. While immigration has not ranked as the top problem often in Gallup’s monthly trend, it stands alone as the most politically polarizing issue in the past 25 years of Gallup’s measurement.

The record surge of migrants at the southern U.S. border in December brought even more focus on the issue — and while attempted crossings have eased slightly since then, they are expected to increase as spring continues. President Joe Biden’s approval rating for his handling of immigration has been persistently poor. With the presidential election about six months away and immigration top of mind, the issue remains a significant vulnerability for Biden as he seeks reelection.”

Source: https://news.gallup.com/poll/644570/immigration-named-top-problem-third-straight-month.aspx

Continue Reading

US News

Illegal Immigration Massively Surges in 2024

Published

on

Illegal Immigration Massively Surges in 2024

Continue Reading

Health

Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, Has Been Diagnosed with Terminal Cancer

This follows his transfer to a medical facility in December

Published

on

The new comes from a letter he wrote:

Continue Reading

Trending