Mediaboss Marketing

On the 11th of August, when Hindus of the country celebrated Janmashtami, a Muslim mob indulged in violence in Bengaluru after being offended by a Facebook post that was allegedly against the Prophet of Islam. The violence led to over 60 police officials being injured and left 3 dead. The Muslim mob hit the streets near DJ Halli and KG Halli police station areas on Tuesday evening and attacked a Congress MLAs house after one of his relatives had allegedly made a derogatory Facebook post. Amidst chants of Allah hu Akbar and Nara e Taqbeer, the Muslim mob also set the police station on fire and attacked the police personnel. However, as per Wikipedia, there is not enough evidence to conclude that the violent mob was Muslim.

The Wikipedia page, in the introductory paragraph terms this unbridled and one-sided violence as a clash. A communal clash would essentially mean that two mobs, in most cases one would consist of people belonging to the Hindu community and the other, would consist of rioters belonging to the Muslim community. However, in this case, to term it a clash would only mean that the author of the post, editors, in the case of Wikipedia, are trying to water down the violence unleashed by the Muslim mob.

So far, there has been no report of any retaliation from the Hindu side. The violence was unleashed by the Muslim mob because they were offended, which they often are, after a Facebook post that allegedly insulted their Prophet. Even from the videos that were uploaded by media, one could hear chants of Allah Hu Akbar and Nara e Taqbeer while the mob pelted stones, burnt down the Congress leaders house and torched the police station.

Interestingly, the Wikipedia page on the Bengaluru violence also does not mention that one of the main accused of instigating the violence was Kaleem Pasha, who has now been arrested. Kaleem Pasha is the husband of Irshad Begum, a BBMP corporator from Nagavara ward. He was arrested by Bengaluru police on Thursday along with 60 others for instigating the August 11 violence in the city. So far, the Bengaluru police have arrested 206 accused of their involvement in the violence.

The Bengaluru police have named Kaleem Pasha as 7th accused in the FIR. According to the police, Kaleem Pasha is also one of the key conspirators behind the deadly violence that took place on Tuesday night.

Kaleem Pasha, who is aformercorporator of Nagavara ward,reportedlyhas close links with the Congress leadership in the state and is known to be an associate of former Karnataka Home Minister and senior Congress leader KJ George. Pasha was booked by Bengaluru police along withlocal SDPI leader Muzammil Pasha for orchestrating the Bengaluru violence. While Muzammil Pasha was already arrested, Kaleem Pasha had escaped.

If all of this was not enough, the Talk page of the Wikipedia article reveals the dangerous mindset of its editors even further.

The Talk page of the Wikipedia article essentially has the editors saying that while the Delhi Riots 2020 Wikipedia page can identify, wrongly, Hindus as going on a rampage, the Bengaluru violence page will not identify all rioters as Muslims since multiple third parties have not done so.

The individual taking exception to that says that most Media has a pronounced Left bias and hence, that is never likely to happen. However, it is a fact that Muslims indulged in violence because they were offended by a Facebook post allegedly about the Prophet of Islam. The person taking exception to the bias of the page also mentions that he will try to get references if anyone has reported it since the ones reporting it (OpIndia) have been blocked by Wikipedia.

It is pertinent to note here that in the Delhi Riots 2020 Wikipedia page, the Leftist editors have only mentioned Tahir Hussain once, to say that he has been arrested for his role in the murder of Ankit Sharma. None of the shocking revelations made by him in his disclosure statement have been added. In fact, even shocking details of his involvement, as made by the police, have not been added to the page.

Coming back to the Bengaluru violence page, after a user takes objection to their bias, the Editor, keeping true to form, warns him of violating Wikipedia norms.

A Muslim mob went on a rampage and unleashed extreme violence in Bengaluru on Tuesday evening over a Facebookpost that was allegedly derogatory to Prophet Mohammad.

According to thereports, the Muslim mob hit the streets near DJ Halli and KG Halli police station areas on Tuesday evening and attacked a Congress MLAs house after one of his relatives had allegedly made a derogatory Facebook post.

Over a 100 people had gathered around the residence of Congress MLA Akhanda Srinivasamurthy around 7:00 PM on Tuesday. Congress MLA Akhanda Srinivasamurthy represents Pulikeshinagar constituency which is reserved for the Scheduled Caste (SC). The Muslim mob, armed with sticks, iron rods, sharp metal objects and other weapons, went berserk and barged into the house of the MLA.

The angry Muslim pelted stones and began to torch vehicles, ATMs, shops near the locality while protesting against the alleged derogatory post made by one of the relatives of Dalit Congress MLA Akhanda Shrinivasamurthy. Social media posts of few people involved in the mob violence indicate that the riots could have been pre-planned as calls for the mobilisation of Muslims were allegedly made on social media platforms on Tuesday evening.

Soon, the situation took an ugly turn after two separate Muslim mobs gathered in front of KG Halli and DJ Halli police stations. The Muslim mobslockedthe gates from outside and pelted stones at the police station. At least 10 vehicles, including Innovas of two DCPs, were damaged in front of the stations. The mob also set fire to the vehicles in front of the DJ Halli police station.

In what seems to be a pre-planned attack by the Muslim mob, the Muslim mob, carrying petrol and other weapons, also barged into the nearest police quarters and attack the premises.

The Muslim mob was seen raising Islamic slogans like Allah-hu-Akbar and Nara-e-Taqbeer outside the police station.

Wikipedia has long shown their Left bias when it comes to important issues.

The Wikipedia article titledNorth East Delhi riotswas created on 25th February by a senior Wikipedia editor that goes by the usernameDBigXray. When one visits the page, the first image one sees is the photo of BJP leader Kapil Mishra, not an image of the riots. Kapil Mishra gets a separate section titled incitement in the article, where he has been blamed for starting the riots.

Interestingly, some people had reference to AAP leader Amanatullah Khan for his provocative speeches during anti-CAA riots earlier in Delhi and UP. But this was also removed by the moderators, claiming that although cases have been filed against Khan, those are not related to the North East Delhi riots. On the 24th, one anti-CAA protester had brandished a pistol and fired 8 shots towards pro-CAA protesters, who was identified as Mohammad Shahrukh. The Wiki page merely mentions him as a shooter and does not even mention that he is from an anti-CAA mob.

After the image of Shahrukh, the firing had gone viral, anti-CAA activists had claimed he is pro-CAA, despite journalists on the ground who had posted videos and images saying he was anti-CAA. Later, high-resolution images had shown he was part of a mob that had several persons in skull caps. When other users wanted to include this information in the Wikipedia article, they were shot down by the moderator. The senior editor, who is supposed to be politically neutral while editing and moderating content on Wikipedia, commented that if the man was a Hindu, media would not have focused on him, and there is no need to include more detail on the incident.

The article mentions the attack on a mosque in Ashok Nagar and shouting of Jai Shri Ram and Hinduon ka Hindustan slogans by the mobs, but have absolutely no reference to anyattackby Muslims and anti-CAA mobs. On the other hand, while there arevideosshowing mob shouting Nara e Taqbeer and Allahu Akbar, they find no place on the page.

Although Wikipedia articles can be edited by anybody, the online encyclopedia has provisions for locking down specific articles to check vandalism, etc. The article on North East Delhi riots has been made semi-protected, which means only confirmed registered users can make edits to it. As a result, ordinary users are having to request user DBigXray for making changes, and user DBigXray, who has special privileges as a Master Editor III, decides what information is included and what is not on the page.

OpIndia detailed investigation about the bias of Wikipedia after the Delhi Riots can be readhereandhere.

There are several other cases where it was evident just how vulnerable Wikipedia is to peddling absolute lies which can be severely detrimental in the long run. An Islamist user hadvandalisedthe RSS page to call it a terrorist organisation. The user who did so had a long history of anti-Hindu edits. Wikipedia had alsodeletedthe article on Tablighi Jamaat after the spread of Coronavirus citing that it was Islamophobic. Further, though the edits were reverted later, an editor of Wikipedia had alsoreplaced Hindus with Muslimsto show that it was actually the Muslims who suffered at the hands of Hindus during the Naokhali Riots and not the other way around.

The bias of Wikipedia is further evidenced by the fact the co-founder of Wikipedia, Larry Senger, had quit Wikipedia citing that the Left bias of the platform is too strong to overcome and that the platform had lost its way.

Read the rest here:
Wikipedia page on Bengaluru violence calls it a clash, refuses to identify rioters as Muslims: Here are the reasons given by the editors - OpIndia

Immediately after Kamala Harris was announced as Joe Biden's Vice Presidential nominee, the race was on to define her. For millions of voters who didn't know much about the junior Senator from California, first impressions would matter. GOP pundits, led by the president, threw a lot of contradictory mud to see what would stick: She's too liberal; she's too authoritarian; she's too "ambitious;" she's "pro-criminal;" she's "nasty;" she's "mad;" she's "not even Black." A baseless birther conspiracy did the rounds, claiming Harris was ineligible for the vice presidency despite being born in Oakland.

Even on Wikipedia, war raged over how to define Harris. Her page was locked as trolls attacked and editors debated their description of her race. Harris' mother was a UC Berkeley cancer researcher born in India; her father was a Black Jamaican economist She identifies as both African American and South Asian American. Eventually, the editors agreed to define her as such.

Luckily, there's a better source for understanding Harris than the judgment of her political opponents or Wikipedia editors: Her own words. We're not talking about her speeches or tweets, but her two very different books on either end of a decade of political upheaval. Smart on Crime was published in 2009 as Harris prepared to run for California Attorney General. The Truths We Hold followed in 2019 as she was preparing her run for president.

Here's what I discovered when I sat down to read both books in the wake of Biden's announcement. As with most autobiographical works, they reveal more than the author intended. The image Harris projected of herself changed significantly as she moved from prosecutor to politician, and as the Democratic base moved left. Both times, what she chose to leave out about herself and about race and policing in America is as interesting as what she included.

Reading the books isn't a slam dunk when it comes to minting new supporters. Harris may come across as too wonkish to some, too likely to shift with the political winds to others.There are a few heartstring-tugging personal moments to be had Harris isn't afraid to tell us how much she ugly-cried when her husband proposed, for example but they are outweighed by lengthy recitations from her hearings and conference calls and speeches, topped with generous sprinkles of statistics.

All of which led me to the first of three main conclusions drawn from the source material:

You can debate the role of Harris parents' race on her life, but you can't ignore the impact their work life had on her. Harris thinks like a scientist and enjoys a good debate on economics. Growing up, she says in Smart on Crime, school was the be-all and end-all of her life, "like breathing and eating." And by all appearances, that never stopped.

As with Barack Obama, who also published two rather different books before running for president, a good adjective to describe Harris is "professorial." Whatever you make of her politics, she will forever be the daughter of academics. She's excited by experiments, such as the Mayor of Stockton's plan for a form of universal basic income, which gets a big shout-out in The Truths We Hold.

Smart on Crime is many things, but it is first and foremost a barrage of data. It's the San Francisco District Attorney trying to convince fellow DAs they should let low-level offenders rehabilitate, focusing their energies on violent crimes instead. Often her arguments are cooly financial: It simply costs too much to prosecute these kids, not to mention the cost of jailing them. Describing a triangular hierarchy of cases, with petty crime swamping the system at the bottom, Harris comes across like a cringingly trendy professor when she calls on readers to "rock the crime pyramid!"

The Truths We Hold is a more soft-edged autobiographical work. But Harris is never as animated as at the end, where she presents a scientific formula for the work of government itself. Step one, test your hypothesis and expect temporary glitches when new ideas are introduced. (Obama's 2013 healthcare.gov rollout is Exhibit A). Step two, go to the scene: You can't understand an issue like globalization until you see how it affects your constituents. Step three, embrace the mundane details of the topic (Harris points to Bill Gates, whose focus on developing world problems led him to become a nerd about the contents of fertilizer).

Kamala Harris speaks at a press conference with Joe Biden on Aug. 13, 2020.

Image: Photo by MANDEL NGAN / AFP via Getty Images

"You have to sweat the small stuff," Harris writes in the later book. "Because sometimes it turns out the small stuff is actually the big stuff." You can easily picture her as the kind of workaholic politician who likes to drown in policy papers rather than rely on her gut. No wonder she became fast friends with fellow Senate policy wonk Elizabeth Warren, who also gets a shout-out in Truths.

Time has not been entirely kind to Smart on Crime. In many ways it is a relic of 2009, that hazy post-election year that preceded the rise of the Tea Party. Back then it was very common to dream of bipartisan progress on a range of issues, and for Democrats to assume that the election of a Black president had somehow solved racism.

Whether that's the reason, or whether she was "code-switching" in order to talk to white law enforcement officials and be heard, Harris barely mentions her multiracial upbringing and completely avoids the history of racist policing in America. The word "race" doesn't appear until page 101, where she warns public defenders not to assume African American juries will be sympathetic to African American defendants. To a reader in the age of George Floyd, her silence on other points regarding the Black experience of law enforcement is deafening.

Sometimes the absence is understandable, given the time frame and the data available. For example, today it's hard to talk about the "broken windows" theory of policing low-level crimes without acknowledging the many studies showing that it often leads to an increase in people of color being arrested, but those studies arrived in the mid-2010s. (Harris mentions it neutrally, in the context of why prosecutors decided to become "tough on crime.")

Other times, it seems downright credulous. Early in the book, Harris mentions the case of Willie Horton, who was used in a pivotal attack ad by George H.W. Bush in the 1988 presidential election. Horton was a Black prisoner who had raped a woman on a work furlough endorsed by Bush's opponent, Michael Dukakis. Even at the time, many observers noted that Horton's race was played up in the ad, the brain child of infamous GOP racist Lee Atwater. In Harris' telling, though, Horton had merely become "the poster child for failed rehabilitation programs," yet another reason for politicians in both parties to act like "swaggering lawmen."

Sure, the positions she outlines in the book, such as her "Back on Track" program which helps find jobs and education for low-level offenders, undoubtedly benefit marginalized communities. It's also worth noting that Harris' office had a policy of not prosecuting marijuana possession charges, which had been disproportionately brought against Black defendants. (She was, as one public defendant wrote in a recent USA Today op-ed, the most progressive DA in California.)

But in 2009, she dared not say such things explicitly, perhaps to avoid irking the GOP types mentioned in this bridge-building book. (Ronald Reagan, Newt Gingrich, and Reagan's secretary of state George Shultz are all applauded for occasionally seeing the importance of rehabilitating offenders.)

By 2019, though, Harris could not avoid the subject. "We need to accept hard truths about systemic racism," she writes in The Truths We Hold, touting the implicit bias training she instituted as California AG. "Police brutality occurs in America and we have to root it out wherever we find it." She name-checks Philando Castile and Eric Garner. At the same time, Harris insists that "it is a false choice to suggest that you must either be for the police or for police accountability. I am for both. Most people I know are for both. Let's speak some truth about that, too."

The irony of this sudden rash of truth-telling is that Harris isn't telling the whole truth about herself and her evolution on the subject of race. Why not talk honestly and openly about how the events of the 2010s swayed her thoughts? Polls show support for Black Lives Matter has risen steadily since the movement began in 2013. Millions of us have had our eyes opened by shocking events. Harris knows there should be no shame in changing your mind based on new data.

But nowhere in the second book does Harris address the curious racelessness of the first. Presumably she feared any kind of mea culpa would provide her opponents with an opening. Fair enough, but it does make a mockery of quotes like this: "I choose to speak truth. Even when it's uncomfortable. Even when it leaves people feeling uneasy."

That may be part of her brand as a Senator and VP candidate, and certainly holds true of her famous questioning of Brett Kavanaugh (which makes it into the book) and Attorney General Bill Barr (which happened after its publication). But it wasn't necessarily the case in her career as DA and AG.

There is at least one area where Smart on Crime and The Truths We Hold tell the same story, and that area is Berkeley. Harris loves to recount her time growing up in a duplex on Bancroft Way, then a working-class street in the university town; her "earliest memory" in both books is of a "sea of legs" in a civil rights march. In both books she is a fussy toddler who, when asked by her mom what she wants, yells back the adorable response "fweedom!"

Beyond those basics, however, it's interesting to note what Harris chooses to tell in each book. Smart on Crime tells us more about her Indian family, including the fact that Harris used to visit India every two years. Her earliest memories on the subcontinent were of "walking along the beach with my grandfather," a diplomat and veteran of the struggle for Indian independence, who "would talk to me about the importance of doing the right thing, the just thing." Her Indian grandmother was an activist for women's rights, and would, well into her 80s, call her to debate San Francisco politics.

In Truths, however, the trips to India were merely "periodic," and you'd never know she had quality time with granddad or calls with grandma. Perhaps the Tea Party's birther nonsense, with Donald Trump devoting years of his life the lie that Obama was born in Kenya, had made Harris wary of clouding her presidential campaign with any talk of time in a foreign country. (She also spends little time on her family's move to Montreal when she was 12, except to note that both her parents came to her high school graduation there despite no longer speaking to each other.)

Kamala Harris signs required documents for receiving the Democratic nomination for Vice President of the United States at the Hotel DuPont on Aug. 14, 2020 in Wilmington, Delaware.

Image: Drew Angerer / Getty Images

Instead, Truths offers plenty more detail of Harris' Black experience in Berkeley. She was bussed to Thousand Oaks Elementary School in a very white part of the city. On Thursdays, her favorite night, her family went to Rainbow Sign, a performance space and restaurant started by 10 Black women. In her formative years here she saw James Baldwin, Shirley Chisholm, Alice Walker, Maya Angelou, and Nina Simone. Rainbow Sign, Harris says, "was where I came to understand that there is no better way to feed someones brain than by bringing together food, poetry, politics, music, dance, and art."

There was a time in American politics, not so long ago, when Harris' biography alone would have marked her out as a radical. Berkeley, San Francisco, California: These used to be bywords for the kind of liberal politician who could never be in touch with "real America," whatever that actually meant. Same goes for a politician opposed to the death penalty, which Harris refused to call for in her prosecutorial career, despite substantial pressure from police. Dukakis was against it, and that tanked his presidential chances in 1988 almost as much as the Willie Horton ad.

But in 2020, the center has shifted. And a politician like Harris, one of the most liberal senators, someone who once would have been seen as a transformational figure in the Obama mold, is derided by many on the left as "a cop" because ... well, because she was good at her job. She increased the percentage of successful prosecutions as both DA and AG, and threatened to prosecute parents of school truants (though she never actually did) because it cut truancy rates, and cutting truancy rates cut crime.

Is her treatment fair? No. But politics rarely is. And in these books, Harris shows she knows how the game has been played thus far. She has spoken different truths to different audiences, honed her message and her brand, and dived into the issues like a true technocrat. What remains to be seen is whether she can adapt again, to an age that prizes passionate and unvarnished politics over the dry and polished version. That version of Kamala Harris certainly exists, as anyone who has seen her increasingly fiery speeches over the past year can attest.

If there is a third book written, perhaps, from the Vice President's residence in the U.S. Naval Observatory we may even get to really meet her in print for the first time.

More Mashable CliffsNotes:

Read the original:
We read Kamala Harris' books. They go deeper than her Wikipedia page. - Mashable

It doesnt look like much. FoodTimeline.orgs two-colour scheme and big HTML links are straight from the era of Alta Vista search engines, Netscape browsers and TCP/IP dial-up Internet.

Born in 1999, a year after Google and two years before Wikipedia, the website charts when an ingredient and recipe may have become part of our diet. From water and salt to test-tube burgers and cronuts, its all there in in obsessive chronological order.

Scroll through the timeline and youll learn that instant noodles (1958) predate chicken tikka masala (1975). That portobello mushrooms didnt get popular until the 1980s, but that lollipops have been called that since at least 1784.

Click on an ingredient, and youre taken to equally featureless but exhaustive pages of culinary history and commentary, offering the where, who and why to the when.

The site says it draws on old cookbooks, newspapers, magazines, National Historic Parks, government agencies, universities, cultural organizations, culinary historians, and company/restaurant websites. But all that highly detailed non-academic ad-free material is the work of one modest New Jersey librarian.

Lynne Olver taught herself HTML in the 1990s, bought the domain name and quietly built up her timeline, answering nearly 25,000 food-related questions from fans along the way.

For Indian food, she relied primarily on KT Achayas Indian Food: A Historical Companion and A Historical Dictionary of Indian Food, both bibles for food researchers on the Indian subcontinent. But Olvers timeline puts local developments into global perspective. If Achaya points out that fermented idlis werent born in India but carried over by the cooks of Indonesian kings between the 8th and the 12th centuries, Olver also lists foods that were introduced, cooked or preserved elsewhere in that period: corned beef, tofu, okra, lychees.

For now, FoodTimeline.org is sort of on the back burner. Olver died from leukaemia in 2015, leaving behind the site and a personal library of 2,300 food-history books, plus thousands of brochures and vintage magazines. The site has been archived by the American Library of Congress. But no one has taken over her mammoth project and no new entries have been made since her death.

The Olver family is looking for someone to keep the timeline going, particularly since archives around the world are getting digitised and easier to cross-reference. Olver did it with no financial aid, no fancy coding skills, no assistance and no food-influencer network. Care to give it a taste?

Follow more stories on Facebook and Twitter

Visit link:
What we ate and when: A journey of food history - Hindustan Times

Meghan Markle's Wikipedia page was edited days before her relationship with Prince Harry was made public in October 2016.

The Duchess of Sussex's occupation was changed from "actress, fashion model, spokesmodel" to "actress, activist, humanitarian" and founder of lifestyle website The Tig, according to records of changes to the site.

"She has also worked with The United Nations Women, where, as an Advocate, she presented at UN Headquarters for the HeforShe Gender Equality Campaign in September 2014.

Advertisement

The changes were made in the same month that news of her relationship with Prince Harry broke, The Mail Online reports. However, it is not clear whether the former actress was behind the edit.

Read more:

Prince Harry told Meghan Markle he loved her after 3 months of dating, and the feeling was mutual, a new book claims

The Duchess of Sussex used her maiden name for the first time since leaving the royal family

Originally posted here:
Meghan Markle's occupation on Wikipedia was changed from 'model' to 'activist' days before her relationship wi - Business Insider India

Wikipedia, the online crowdsourced encyclopaedia which have been facing controversy due to its obvious leftist bias in its editorial decisions, have categorised a major American media house, Fox News, as being unreliable. Fox News is considered to be leaning towards right-wing, and is disliked by left-wing intellectuals.

Earlier, Fox News was categorised as a green-level source on the Reliable sources/Perennial sources of Wikipedia, but not it has been downgraded to yellow-level, which means editors are advised to exercise caution while quoting Fox News for articles. A discussion on the reliability of Fox News website is still going on Wikipedia editors and administrators. In the discussion for Fox News, there was no consensus on its reliability, the media house has been still downgraded to yellow level by the administrators saying that there was no consensus.

The downgrading of the news network followed an intense discussion on Wikipedia. During the discussion, while most contributors said that the talk and opinion shows on the network are biased, the network is pro-Trump, and they have been criticising rioting and violence in the name of the Black Lives Matter protests, the normal reports of the network are reliable. Several editors pointed out that Fox News appreciates fact-checking of its reports and issues corrections whenever errors are pointed out, which proves that the news network is reliable.

It is notable that while the discussion was on reliability of Fox News as a source of Wikipedia articles, almost everyone who opposed it cited the talk and political commentary shows on the network, and not their plain news reports. Such shows generally tend to be biassed towards one narration or the other, and opinion articles and shows are not used as a source for Wikipedia articles. There was no major complaint of regular news reports of the network being biased. Despite the fact that most people agreed that their new reports are not biased, and only their opinion shows are biased, three Wikipedia administrators concluded the discussion saying that there is no consensus regarding the reliability of Fox News, and then went on to downgrade it. They have mentioned that for science and political referencing there is no consensus regarding the reliability of Fox News, but for other subjects it is generally considered reliable.

Although all editorial decisions in Wikipedia are supposed to be decided by consensus among editors, the reality is different. Being a crowdsourced platform where any internet user can make contributions, it is virtually impossible to arrive at a consensus on most subjects. The consensus is not at all possible in where there are diverse views, and often, it is select few Wikipedia administrators take a decision after closing the discussions. And they make the decision based on their personal opinion, not based on majority views. There is no voting on Wikipedia, and no matter how strongly one makes a point, it may be overruled by others. In theory, an article should represent all different views on it, but in reality, only one sides opinion prevails, which often happens to be the left-liberal view.

Perhaps reacting to the Fox News downgrading, The co-founder of Wikipedia, Larry Sanger, who is no longer involved with Wikipedia, tweeted on Saturday that consensus is not possible on Wikipedia. He said that it stopped being something that can be taken seriously in around 2002.

Larry also said that when he was associated with Wikipedia, the policy was the presentation of many competing theories on a wide variety of subjects, which suggested that the creators of Wikipedia trust readers competence to form their own opinions themselves. But Wikipedia DESPISES this view today, he said.

He said that after the last version of Neutral point of view policy that he had wrote in 2002, the policy has changed a lot and now it is complete opposite.

Wikipedias already known left bias was evident in the way OpIndia is represented on it. 3-4 years ago, when a simple neutral article on OpIndia was published on the Wikipedia, it was deleted by leftist editors saying the website is not worthy of a Wiki article. But one year later, the same people who had deleted it created a new page on OpIndia, which is highly negative towards the portal. The senior editor who wrote it made baseless allegations against OpIndia in the article, and anyone who tried to counter that was silenced with threats of ban, and any such edits were removed. With a pronounced Left bias in the platform itself and even in the community-driven editors, the OpIndia page on Wikipedia really did not stand a chance at neutrality.

In another instance, Wikipedias left-liberal bias was evident on the page on Delhi riots. While the Wiki page portrayed BJP leader Kapil Mishra as the mastermind behind the riots, the editors had refused to even mention the name of AAP leader Tahir Hussain, after the videos of him leading the riots from his house had went viral on social media. The editor who is also behind the negative article on OpIndia had said that IC official Ankit Sharma, who was stabbed multiple times and was tortured to death, was not notable enough to be mentioned in the Wikipedia article.

The co-founder of Wikipedia, Larry Sanger, who is no longer involved with Wikipedia had gone on the record to talk about the bias of the online encyclopaedia. Sanger had written that it has long forgotten its original policy of aiming to present information from a neutral point of view, and nowadays the crowd-sourced online encyclopaedia can be counted on to cover politics with a liberal point of view.

The downgrading of Fox News on Wikipedia as a reliable source despite having no consensus on it is the latest example of the attempt of the left-wing to silence right-wing voices.

View post:
Left dominated Wikipedia displays bias against conservative voices yet again, downgrades reliability of Fox News after discussion by Wiki Editors -...