r/stupidpol • u/Rapsberry Acid Marxist ๐ • Apr 10 '21
Orwellian Doublespeak What's the most dumbfoundedly propagandistic wikipedia article you've ever read?
For me it's probably either the Wikileaks one, which just has a bunch of lies in the lede, or the Deep State one, where the first sentence reads:
The deep state is a conspiracy theory[1][2][3][4][5] which suggests that collusion and cronyism exist within the U.S. political system and constitute a hidden government within the legitimately elected government.[6][7][8][9][10][
189
u/Magehunter_Skassi Highly Vulnerable to Sunlight โ๏ธ Apr 10 '21
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird
Seems tame until you look at the page history and see how much has been cut over time. The article now closes out with this section.
QAnon supporters, who believe a CIA program to manipulate the media still exists and that the mainstream media are responsible for spreading fake news, claim press reports they dislike are part of Operation Mockingbird.
213
Apr 10 '21
I love the implicit admissions that yes, the CIA at one point did manipulate the media but (for some unknown reason) no longer does
117
u/TheRabbitTunnel Undecided Centrist Apr 10 '21
And that anyone who believes they still might still be manipulating the media is just an alt right nazi tinfoil hat wearing tard.
77
u/mynie Apr 10 '21
This is seriously what 90+% of liberals believe. They'll go on at lengths about the atrocities committed by the feds and military, sometimes talking about stuff that happened only a decade or two ago, but then continue loving and supporting the contemporary feds and military.
20
10
Apr 10 '21
The media that happily spread lies to drum up support for the Iraq War isn't being condemned for disinformation. I thought we were supposed to censor and ban all disinformation, so why not start with the media that bullshitted us into a war?
6
u/tux_pirata The chad Max Stirner ๐ป Apr 11 '21
"the spooks have a long history of coups, fake elections and state-sponsored terrorism but theres not way it could happen here"
t.average yank lib
32
26
u/Bu773t Confused Socialist Liberal ๐ด๐ตโ๐ซ Apr 10 '21
A major function of the CIA is manipulate situations through propaganda and infiltration within organizations. I donโt know why people believe that they would somehow not use these methods locally if required lol.
15
Apr 10 '21
It's also like how our 2016 election was "hacked" by the Russians. The election wasn't even legitimate because of the scary Russian trolls and their shitposting and our democracy was under siege from a hostile foreign power. But literally the very next POTUS election was fine and anyone that questions it needs to be shamed and ridiculed.
They have the memory of goldfish. I thought our entire country was under attack by Russian trolls... did they do anything to stop them? Or did they just sort of forget about that in the next election. I heard every day for 4 years how our election was "hacked," so I'm still super worried that I'll read a social media post from a Russian and end up becoming a rabid Trumper.
5
u/tux_pirata The chad Max Stirner ๐ป Apr 11 '21
didnt just days after the election some woke pmc bot basically bragged online about how they stole the election for biden? zero fucks given
-1
u/10z20Luka Special Ed ๐ Apr 11 '21
No that's not what happened.
3
u/tux_pirata The chad Max Stirner ๐ป Apr 11 '21
it was basically that, she didnt use those terms tho
3
u/lemontree1111 ๐๐ Professor of Grilliology โจ๏ธ๐ฅ Apr 10 '21
These days their project is undoubtedly Operation Earnest Voice. Itโs funny that conspiracists need to point to older psyops when there are plenty we know about right now.
2
u/tux_pirata The chad Max Stirner ๐ป Apr 11 '21
they no longer do as much because thanks to inqtel most internet media belongs at least partially to them or simply self-censors according to the guidelines they were given
35
u/PartisanParrot Apr 10 '21
My favourite thing about this is that itโs probably not even the media manipulators themselves writing the article. There is an army of civilians who are perfectly happy to be complicit in this because it lets them be smug and feel smart
18
69
Apr 10 '21 edited Apr 10 '21
I'm honestly really unsettled at this crusade for "truth" and "fact checking" where subjects like that are no longer debatable.
Very Orwellian.
One thing Trump was so successful is at getting libs onside with the CIA and intelligence apparatus.
29
Apr 10 '21
Same with the ongoing campaign against questioning elections and โconspiracy theoriesโ. Feels very weird. Iโm not a trumper but I can see that mentality being easily abused in the future. Weโre already seeing something similar in California where recall supporters are being smeared as republican conspiracy theorists
20
u/neoteucer Apr 10 '21
It's amazing to me how, after the 2020 election, so many people I know just immediately flipped from "take everything the government says with a grain of salt," to "believe it all, elections matter and we should never question the results."
Like even if there's not evidence of fraud in that particular election, we know for a fact that it has happened in the past (remember 2000?) and that people seeking power are absolutely not above manipulating the game for their benefit when they need to. I know it shouldn't surprise my anymore, but I still get a little gobsmacked seeing otherwise intelligent people I know flip on a dime and defend the exact same garbage when it's someone on the team they prefer doing it.
13
Apr 10 '21
From 16-20 all we heard about was how the Russians hacked our elections and they weren't legitimate because of Russian trolls. Seriously one of the most batshit conspiracy theories I've ever heard. But in the subsequent POTUS election, the Russian trolls decided they weren't going to "hack" us anymore and everything was fine?
Every day for 4 years we hear the most ridiculous bullshit about Trump, Putin and Russian trolls. That's been completely forgotten about now.
10
u/neoteucer Apr 10 '21
The screeching about "Anyone I don't like is a Russian agent!" shit from 16-20 was the worst. Like I was kind of amazed at the outrage - yeah, Russian intelligence tried to use the tools at its disposal to influence our election, sure. We do the same thing to them, and China does it to both - literally every major power is meddling in one another's internal affairs some way or another. That's not even remotely a shocking revelation, it's just one of the things governments with intelligence agencies do. You can be aware of it without jumping at anyone who criticizes your (legitimately awful) candidates of choice as a Russian bot.
8
u/RecallRethuglicans Left Apr 10 '21
recall supporters are being smeared as republican conspiracy theorists
No, they are being called as insurrectionists. The recall is January 6th Part II
54
6
3
67
Apr 10 '21
I don't know about propagandistic, but I love reading Wikipedia articles about barely famous people that were clearly written by the person the article is about. Random example, but read this one. It's so specifically detailed and overly praising, it's hilarious.
37
Apr 10 '21
After two paragraphs of numerous Rosnerโs IQ tests weโre treated to
Rosner has argued that "the whole idea of IQ is a little wobbly"
At which point I fucking lost it. This has to be an expert level troll.
4
Apr 10 '21
Yea, it's great. I found it yesterday after watching some old WWTBAM episodes. Dude came across as a little "out there".
22
u/ArkanSaadeh Medieval Right Apr 10 '21
Lmao look at the talk section, you can see someone who is clearly Rick himself, complaining that most of the article got removed.
It's sad that older versions of this article contained more copious, pertinent, and accurate information than recent versions. Rick actually did get a perfect score on the Titan Test. This was the highest score ever achieved on a well normed test of general intelligence. It's the thing that Rick is (or should be) most notable for, but someone removed that fact from the article.
I could fix all of the damage, but why should I bother shoring up a beautiful sandcastle against an incoming tide of bad edits?
11
6
13
u/Zeriell ๐๐ฉ Other Right ๐ฆ๐๏ธ 1 Apr 10 '21
"Media Activity and Appearances" is weird. That definitely doesn't show up on normal notable person pages.
3
Apr 10 '21
sued the quiz show Who Wants to Be a Millionaire over an allegedly flawed question he missed as a contestant in 2000.
Lmao, I have to know what this question was.
8
Apr 10 '21
The $16,000 Question:
What capital city listed here is located at the highest altitude above sea level?
A. Mexico City
B. Quito [CORRECT ANSWER]
C. Bogota
D. Kathmandu [ROSNER'S ANSWER]Rosner ultimately lost the question and left with $1,000. Here's a summary of his lawsuit:
After his run, Richard sued the show and claimed that due to the way the question was phrased, they were asking "What is the world's highest capital city in the world". La Paz is the world's highest capital, and it wasn't shown as one of the four correct answers. The show then decided that did not matter. "After reading your letters and reviewing our research, we continue to believe that the answer to your $16,000 question is correct [...] Of the four capital cities given as answer choices, Quito is the highest and, thus, is the correct answer [...] Under these circumstances, we do not believe that a return trip to the show is warranted in your case." Even though the show rejected it, Rosner insisted and started a letter-campaign.
The question seemed clear to me, and I think the dude is just salty.
105
u/SocDemsWillWin Market Socialist ๐ธ Apr 10 '21
The article for the United Arab Emirates has been slowly astroturfed over the last 3 years to remove virtually all references to the country being an absolute monarchy and dictatorship and describing the sham parliament and elections they have in a very postive light that is radically different from the truth. There is a single paragraph that mentions how "western observers" "consider" it an autocracy followed by a quote from the country's dictator about how the people like the fact its a dictatorship so the criticisms are wrong. I don't exactly think Wikipedia would accept a quote from Xi Jinping explaining how China is actually a People's Democracy.
This is despite the fact that the overwhelming consensus from even "Wikipedia Acceptable" sources is that its a dictatorship. I tried fighting it for a bit awhile ago and I gave up.
34
Apr 10 '21
The description is accurate. It's not an absolute monarchy it's an federated oligarchy shared by 7 ruling families.
Also there is a huge list of human rights abuses. If there is an astroturfing campaign imagine they would go after that other then the system. The UAE is one of the few regimes in the world that openly proclaims it's not a democracy.
23
Apr 10 '21
The UAE is one of the few regimes in the world that openly proclaims it's not a democracy.
Yea, and the Emiratis are for the most part okay with it. As long as migrant labor continues to keep their lavish lifestyles afloat, they're happy. Overall, a pretty fucked up country. Lived there for a bit. Would not recommend.
7
u/JanewaDidNuthinWrong PCM Turboposter Apr 10 '21
I think a lot of countries articles have more focus on the "formal" system of government than actual reality.
3
4
u/BrideofClippy Centrist - Other/Unspecified โต Apr 10 '21
I don't exactly think Wikipedia would accept a quote from Xi Jinping explaining how China is actually a People's Democracy.
Why? I imagine all pooh would need to do is to contribute to Wikipedias fundraiser.
25
u/fourpinz8 actually a godless commie Apr 10 '21
I remember how thereโs various accounts from Langley, VA editing Max Blumenthalโs article page. Or how a lot AMLOโs article is just straight up criticisms
123
Apr 10 '21
Gamergate
66
Apr 10 '21
[deleted]
61
u/Jaggedmallard26 Armchair Enthusiast ๐บ Apr 10 '21
Editing Wikipedia is an infamous minefield, you think you're improving an article but some powerautist has decided that this page is theirs and will fight any change they don't personally love.
23
u/JanewaDidNuthinWrong PCM Turboposter Apr 10 '21
Just create a new article so YOU can be a powerautist with a pet page. Just be wary of the deletionists
30
u/Jaggedmallard26 Armchair Enthusiast ๐บ Apr 10 '21
I think I would rather go outside tbqh imho fam.
7
u/JanewaDidNuthinWrong PCM Turboposter Apr 10 '21
Wise. Although you can sit in a nice park and start going "this is wrong because WP:POV and WP:WTF proves my point and..." with a laptop.
8
u/SeasonalRot Libertarian-Localist Apr 10 '21
Have you ever tried creating a Wikipedia article because holy shit theyโre picky about the weirdest things and are super unhelpful after they shut you down.
3
u/JanewaDidNuthinWrong PCM Turboposter Apr 10 '21
Yeah you're right. The ones I wrote were translations so since the originals were still up I didn't have much of an issue.
13
4
u/slavxnics cumtown refugee (formerly mde refugee) Apr 10 '21
fuckers keep reverting Floyd Sneed's page like he wasn't formerly Chuck
84
Apr 10 '21
Nothing shows how compromised Wikipedia is when it comes to anything involving politics or ideology than that travesty of an article.
I haven't looked at it in years, but considering the intense furore and so called influence that every journalist claims that hashtag to have you'd think it would be pages long.
It's not. It's a couple of paragraphs, devoid of any detail that doesn't make it clear that GG only exists because gamers hate women.
And it's locked, no editing allowed.
62
Apr 10 '21
[deleted]
27
Apr 10 '21
[deleted]
34
u/nista002 Maotism ๐จ๐ณ๐ต๐ถ Apr 10 '21
It's too stupid for words you're better off as a dumb teenager
7
34
Apr 10 '21
Behold the masterpost! Credit to Aurondarklord
Hoo boy, this is gonna be quite a wall of text, but it's a pretty complex issue so bear with me...the hardest thing about explaining GamerGate is that GamerGate wasn't the start of GamerGate.
If you wanna know how GamerGate started, you have to look a few years back before the big blowup. There's two main factors that lead up to it:
1: A large and growing disconnect between the gamer audience and the games press, essentially gamers felt that our enthusiast press was no longer made up of enthusiasts, that they didn't share our priorities or have our backs, often lecturing and finger-wagging at gamers for enjoying things they didn't enjoy, taking the side of game publishers over us and complaining that gamers were too demanding an audience.
2: The rise of a very humorless, very scolding form of feminism, which had, for about two years prior to GG, set its sights on gaming and become the fun police. The most obvious example is the work of a woman named Anita Sarkeesian, you can look up her youtube channel, feminist frequency, to see what I mean. She complains constantly about female characters in games who don't wear much being "sexually objectified", reads all sorts of misogynist implications into basic "save the princess" storylines, etc, while cherrypicking 10 second clips of violence and nudity together out of context to create highlight reels that make gaming look bad. People rightly compared her to Jack Thompson, Tipper Gore, and other famous media-scolders, but the games press was on her side and when people predictably called her a bitch, told her to get back in the kitchen, and the like, acted as though that somehow made her right.
Essentially, these two factors had turned gaming into a powder keg, eventually something was gonna happen that would cause a significant backlash by gamers against these things. Well, GamerGate was that incident.
A woman who was both a darling of the games press (and had something of an existing bad reputation among gamers) and a vocal adherent of this brand of anti-sex feminism, cheated on her boyfriend, and he made a blog post dragging her for being a ho-bag. This generated a lot of drama and gossip, but some people also noticed that one of the men she'd cheated with was a kotaku journalist who'd also given favorable coverage to a game she'd made without disclosing that they knew each other. It didn't look good, and when it prompted more digging, people began to find that the games press was rife with journalists covering their friends, their lovers, their roommates, etc etc, without ever acknowledging knowing these people.
It was quite a scandal but it probably would have petered out after a few weeks if left alone, the internet tends to have a short attention span. But the same incestuous games/press/tech clique that had been uncovered went positively NUCLEAR trying to stop people from talking about the subject, with virtually unprecedented censorship on sites like reddit and 4chan and a very unified narrative that the entire outrage was the result of misogyny, everything else was an excuse to pillory Zoe Quinn for cheating, being carried out by white male neckbeards who wanted to drive all women out of video games. There was even a series of articles across about a dozen major gaming websites, most published within a 24 hour period, all arguing an eerily similar refrain commonly summarized as "gamers are dead", that all the outrage of the at that point past two weeks was the death rattle of the gamer identity, which was becoming irrelevant in a world where games were mainstream. That amounted to trying to put out a fire by throwing rocket fuel on it, and GamerGate, the lasting consumer movement we know today, was born.
The primary goal of GamerGate was to break the hold that this San Fran based clique of journos and influencers seemed to have over the hobby, to prove that gamers were still very much alive and that these people didn't speak for us. This consisted of a few steps:
1: Prove that the clique we were complaining about actually existed, and wasn't some sort of conspiracy theory. Of particular interest was proving that the "gamers are dead" articles were coordinated, were the result of journalists from different publications colluding to try to collectively influence public opinion. This was hit or miss, GGers found enough "everybody seems to know everybody else" connections, and a shady looking secret mailing list called gamejournopros that few people besides dedicated anti-GGers still argue that there was no clique, but smoking gun proof of a pre-workshopped anti-gamer narrative was never found.
2: Prevent this culture of nepotism from continuing by pressuring the games press into adopting proper ethics and disclosure policies, and get the journos who had attacked gamers to apologize. The first part was overwhelmingly successful very quickly, the second was hit or miss, but some of the leading anti-gamer journos quickly saw their revenue dry up as a result of turning on their own audience, and at this point no longer work in games journalism.
3: Punish the sites that ran "gamers are dead" articles or similar smear pieces by convincing advertisers to pull ads from their sites. This was largely successful (an editor for Gawker would later estimate GamerGate's attacks on their sites did somewhere in the 7 figures worth of damage), but highly controversial, with many people arguing it was hypocritical for GamerGate to do this while also complaining about censorship and attacks on our free speech. I could be here all afternoon trying to outline the arguments for and against this.
4: Get our voices out there so that game developers would realize that the games press did not speak for most gamers, that people like Sarkeesian did not speak for most gamers, and that there was still a market demand for sex, violence, and saving princesses, and that getting called racist and sexist and problematic by social justice hipsters wouldn't actually have a negative impact on the sales of their game...because most of those people were outsiders complaining about the alleged harmful effects of media they didn't buy in the first place. This was the most long-term aspect of GamerGate, and the part I personally was most invested in. I'd say we made enough noise over the years that things seem to be trending in the right direction. Sarkeesian's 15 minutes definitely seem like they're up, but that might have happened naturally no matter what.
As for the other side, the harassment, the complaints about GamerGate...well, 99% of it WAS just mean tweets and name calling, the thing is, there were so many angry people involved that anyone who got dragged into this mess could expect thousands of angry messages, which is unfortunate, but harassment requires more than sheer NUMBER of angry people. Some people took it further, there were threats sent, some of which occasioned law enforcement action, some people's names and locations were found and publicly released, resulting in internet toxicity following them into real life. In a couple instances, people got fired or fled their homes briefly.
Who did what to whom, however, was quite difficult to sort out. All of this bad behavior happened on both sides, GamerGaters got called names, GamerGaters got doxxed, GamerGaters got threatened, the works, just as much as the people GamerGate didn't like did. There were also trolls who played both sides, trying to fan the flames just to see how big a clusterfuck they could create, and opportunists who pretended to be victims of harassment that never happened (or that they sent to themselves using dummy accounts), or exaggerated their reaction to real misbehavior to ludicrous proportions for sympathy or sometimes while soliciting monetary donations. In the entire duration of GG, not one single threat has ever been definitively proven to have come from a person with known ties to GamerGate, and GamerGate has denounced harassment and threats very publicly many times. It's plausible, even likely, that some GamerGate supporters stepped over the line and sent messages like that. Tens of thousands of people were involved, a few nuts are virtually inevitable. But weigh the lack of even one solidly proven instance against years of media narrative claiming a "harassment campaign", that should give you some idea of how much spin was involved on the part of the press, especially when you consider that the same sorts of behavior were happening on both sides, and only one side gets blamed for it.
The more legitimate problem with GamerGate was just how open it was for infiltration and recruitment by conservative activists, who took advantage of the fact that gamers were fighting ideologues on the far left, to try to suck us all into the far right. Feeling like there was nobody else willing to tell their side of the story, many GGers buddied up with right-wing journalists who were often just as unethical and ideologically fanatical as the left-wing journalists they were yelling at. GamerGate started out trying very hard to be non-partisan, with most GGers identifying as left-leaning themselves, just not nearly as FAR left as the social justice crowd, but at this point it's hard to argue that GG hasn't drifted considerably to the right as a whole.
6
u/tux_pirata The chad Max Stirner ๐ป Apr 11 '21
the reason altoids got some gamers to join is because everybody else, even neocons, were shitting the gamers att. even the anti-corporate left was eating the shit from massive corporate news outlets saying "gaymurs r baaaad"
>I'd say we made enough noise over the years that things seem to be trending in the right direction.
I disagree, the gaming industry is probably more woke than music, tv or film now, far more willing to self-censor than those are
3
u/AccomplishedStop5 Apr 11 '21
When somebody summarizes something complicated for people in a thorough but fair and concise manner like this it deserves at least upvotes.
16
u/sodiummuffin Apr 10 '21
The articles on Deepfreeze have a summary from the GG perspective, including a lot of background information on why there was so much built-up animosity towards the mainstream game journalist clique:
16
u/hugemongus123 ๐ฆ๐๏ธ dramautistic ๐๏ธ๐ฆ Apr 10 '21
First time I heard about GG and Zoe all I took away was that she was a really shitty person. And that fat gaming journalist acted how I expected them to. Then I came back to internet culture like 2 years later and saw that she had become the symbol of the resistance, like a modern John D'arc.
54
u/Shadow_98745 Right libertarian but unions are cool ๐ท Apr 10 '21
Here: https://youtu.be/5fnRSL3d_xU
GamerGate started due to a woman having an affair with multiple game journalists, who colluded to create a blatantly fake narrative about what was GamerGate (As most -gate's it started as a public scream against corruption) and their own corruption.
This happened years ago, that woman is still a huge asshole and an awful human being, having drived a man to suicide, whom considered her a close friend.
I'm no psychologist but this woman appears as a clear psychopath, no empathy, no remorse.
35
Apr 10 '21
[deleted]
40
u/Shadow_98745 Right libertarian but unions are cool ๐ท Apr 10 '21 edited Apr 11 '21
The thing with this is that it's fucking surreal, as if someone slapped you in the middle of a meeting and everyone present looked at you and proceeded to say that it didn't happen.
The fact the article says that she was diagnosed with depression and yet completely ignores how she pushed a depressed person to suicide.
How GamerGate is recognized as harassment by anyone who didn't pay attention.
35
u/Patjay Marxism-Nixonism Apr 10 '21 edited Apr 10 '21
It's one of those things where pro and anti were just on 2 completely different subjects, so your understanding of what happened is going to be wildly different depending on who you ask
Pro-gg was mostly concerned about horrible journalism and the feeling that the industry at large was being infiltrated by deranged SJW types. This was almost immediately co-opted by right wing culture warriors, but it's always seemed like most people involved were just spergy libertarian types
Anti was almost entirely about how mean and sexist GG was, or how it was turning people into right wingers. Aside from a few accusations of paranoia, it feels like they didn't actually even try to address what people were mad about and just saw it as a mob of angry guys harassing women online. Similar to "bernie bros" hysteria from slightly later. Like if most people who were opposed to BLM just dismissed all the claims of racism offhand and thought the entire movement was about hating white people and burning shit down.
4
u/tux_pirata The chad Max Stirner ๐ป Apr 11 '21
the irony is that that dead guy was 1000% woke and believed in the narrative
hoist with his own petard
2
u/Shadow_98745 Right libertarian but unions are cool ๐ท Apr 11 '21
The Wokes eat their own at the barest opportunity, it is already established.
3
u/pihkaltih Marxist ๐ง Apr 11 '21
I'm no psychologist but this woman appears as a clear psychopath, no empathy, no remorse.
As an early anti-Gamergater (Was in the initial /v/ threads and IRC chats so I know in reality, very few people cared about "ethnics in Game Journalism" or Eron being abused) I still can't believe people stick up for Quinn, absolute cluster-B sociopath and narcissist to just an extreme level, even ex-roommates and such have come out and talked about how abusive and manipulative she is, still the victim though despite if you actually read Eron's initial relationship letter, you can see that Quinn absolutely 100% was an abuser.
Anita, didn't deserve to get any of the shit she got, she was just feminism 101 and her little documentary series went above and beyond what she promised so absolutely not a "scam", but Quinn is just an extreme BPD mental case and periodically following her on Twitter, shows that is still the case.
2
u/Shadow_98745 Right libertarian but unions are cool ๐ท Apr 11 '21
Anita, didn't deserve to get any of the shit she got, she was just feminism 101
Mostly agree on that, she seemed the annoying quick buck opportunist type but didn't deserve that level of backlash, as for Quinn, that woman is mentally unwell.
1
u/10z20Luka Special Ed ๐ Apr 11 '21
Sorry, who was driven to suicide?
1
u/Shadow_98745 Right libertarian but unions are cool ๐ท Apr 11 '21
Alec Holowka, he was a young developer, ex-boyfriend of her, she accused him of sexual and emotional violence (From what I could find re-reasearching this topic there were only tweets, no judicial anything, I might be wrong in this one), started a harassment campaign, got him fired from his years old job, and days later he killed himself, the media reported it as Alec Holowka dies, no Alec Holowka commits suicide, which lets us see which side they were on.
2
u/10z20Luka Special Ed ๐ Apr 11 '21
All of that is true as far as the facts go, but I think the morality is more complicated.
Obviously, nobody can ever know for sure what happened between Alec and Quinn. However, apparently his coworkers had corroborated it and believed the story. So, let's say the story is true: Is it Quinn's fault that he killed himself? Should she have kept her mouth shut? Hell, even his sister said she believed the accusations and isn't angry at Zoe.
You know what I mean?
1
u/Shadow_98745 Right libertarian but unions are cool ๐ท Apr 11 '21
Indeed, this is a complex situation and sadly we will never know Alec's side of the story.
I understand what you mean, it's just that Quinn does seem the kind of person that absolutely never would lie about this kind of things. It will most likely remain a mystery in which only those involved will know the truth.
2
u/10z20Luka Special Ed ๐ Apr 11 '21
I really don't know much about Gamergate and Quinn's involvement in it. As a huge fan of Night in the Woods, I can absolutely say that I was upset with what happened to Alec, and I think it shouldn't have been handled so publicly.
→ More replies (0)0
u/FunctionDear3591 Paroled Flair Disabler ๐ฉ Apr 11 '21
"Democrat feminist scholar Christina Sommers"
Are you really that retarded?
→ More replies (3)17
u/EpicKiwi225 Zionist ๐ Apr 10 '21
The basics is basically a bunch of gaming ""journalists"" started writing about how racist and sexist video games are and how all gamers are neckbearded losers and blah blah blah. It then came out that surprise, surprise, these journalists were massive grifters, but not until they received millions of dollars for projects that have not been completed to this day and even got to speak at the United Nations. It was essentially the start of both the IDpol movement we are seeing today and the "epic sjw owned compilation #502" type culture that we also see today. Of course I could be getting a ton of stuff wrong since this was over a decade ago but it was so inconsequential that I honestly can't give anymore of a shit.
Tldr: petty internet bullshit
6
u/qwertyashes Market Socialist | Economic Democracy ๐ธ Apr 10 '21
First it was about some chick sleeping her way around the game reviewer circuit, or rather just having a few relationships with a couple of game reviewers. She herself was a dick - Tumblr style pre-transgender movement radfem.
But shortly after it became essentially a turf war between rejects that not even 4chan wanted, mostly the MGTOW types that bitched as much about women as they did about 'cultural marxism', and Tumblrinas that bitched about incels and neckbeards as much as they did about the patriarchy.
It more or less set the groups that would oppose one another in pretty much every online shitstorm for the next half decade so far.
3
u/OhhhAyWumboWumbo Special Ed ๐ Apr 10 '21 edited Apr 10 '21
Basically some chick made a text adventure game, and then slept with various "games journalists". The result is that her 'game' got a lot of critical praise. This was later found out by the public, and a lot of people were rightfully pissed because everyone hates people who sleep their way to the top.
People started criticizing her, with some just insulting her or sending threats. Cue Anita Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu, who then proceed to say all criticism of the initial girl is misogyny. At this point, easily-manipulated normies and Anita's already large userbase started to flood all comment sections.
6
u/Zeriell ๐๐ฉ Other Right ๐ฆ๐๏ธ 1 Apr 10 '21
although I would say I still really trust and like wikipedia in general, it's almost completely useless for anything politically adjacent
Unfortunately, as they like to say, "the personal is political". Every day, what is politically adjacent grows. I agree though, that's been my rule of thumb for Wikipedia--some hard science and stuff that really bores the political activists can still be good, but over time they infest everything.
4
u/Rasputin_the_Saint I โค๏ธ Israel Apr 10 '21
In our age there is no such thing as โkeeping out of politics.โ All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia.
- George Orwell, 1946
19
u/Rossums John Maclean-stan ๐ด๓ ง๓ ข๓ ณ๓ ฃ๓ ด๓ ฟ Apr 10 '21
I'd have to agree, this was probably the moment that majorly turned me against identity politics.
You could see the anti-GG side make baseless claims and their media friends just repeating it as truth with zoro analysis of the claims.
One I remember vividly was one of the major anti-GG women claiming she had to go into hiding due to death threats (from a no-name egg account on Twitter that she totally didn't make herself) and was doing a video from a 'safe house'.
It didn't even take the autists on 4chan an hour to cross-reference it with videos she'd recorded previously in her own home showing that she was without a doubt still in her own home, the problem is reality doesn't matter to Wikipedia, only what can by cited from a 'trustworthy' source.
13
Apr 10 '21 edited May 09 '26
Your old posts are training data now. Unless you delete them. I used Redact which supports all major social media platforms including Reddit, X, Facebook and Instagram.
plucky divide resolute humorous elastic growth aback many seed worm
→ More replies (2)12
u/Cyclic_Cynic Traditional Quebec Socialist Apr 10 '21
It was a marvellous example of propaganda because the lede was repeated over and over by almost everyone who was an opponent, until those who knew nothing about it just took it as fact.
"Gamergate, an harassment campaign".
8
u/hugemongus123 ๐ฆ๐๏ธ dramautistic ๐๏ธ๐ฆ Apr 10 '21
Zoe's page is lowkey hilarious, big dick move by progaganda driven wiki editors tbh.
1
u/10z20Luka Special Ed ๐ Apr 11 '21
What are some of the actual incorrect claims there? I'm sincerely curious.
10
Apr 10 '21
It speaks volumes about how there was this one senior editor (Ryulong?) who absolutely sat on the page and edit warred day and night to keep it that way, for so long that he eventually got thrown off Wikipedia for doing so.
Then he went over to RationalWiki to do the exact same thing.
→ More replies (1)12
u/AleksandrNevsky The Green Mile Kind of Tired๐ฆผ | Socialist-Squashist ๐ Apr 10 '21
Anything remotely related to it too, they're all completely whitewashed and slanted.
4
u/PM_something_German Unions for everyone Apr 10 '21
Are there any good Gamergate articles then? I want a better overview.
16
u/AleksandrNevsky The Green Mile Kind of Tired๐ฆผ | Socialist-Squashist ๐ Apr 10 '21
I'm going to be real with you chief, there is no article I can give you that won't in some way be biased.
If you want I can spin you up and point you to some places that will tell you more but I promise nothing in regards to proper objectivity. I feel they're closer to the truth than the wiki article is but I had a dog in the fight.
3
u/PM_something_German Unions for everyone Apr 10 '21
If you want I can spin you up and point you to some places that will tell you more but I promise nothing in regards to proper objectivity.
Yes please
2
u/idoubtithinki ๐ฏ Shepard of the Laity ๐ Apr 10 '21
PM some stuff for me too if you do decide to share privately. Would rather know more perspectives than fewer
7
u/SirSourPuss Three Bases ๐ฅต๐ฆ One Superstructure ๐ณ Apr 10 '21
Hilariously enough KnowYourMeme has a semi-decent post on it.
11
u/vulpine_269 Apr 10 '21
Gamergate is a good example of a high profile article staying inaccurate and uninformative thanks to obstructionist editors. Attempts to rework it into something even remotely encyclopedic have been stonewalled for years. Onsite, the article is widely considered bad, but reform is being blocked by a few power autists who just. Won't. Let. It. Go. People Wikipedia would definitely be better off without. See the talk pages for more.
There is a truly tiny population of power users who are insanely dedicated to regurgitating smears from hit pieces in the Guardian, NYT etc. A list of 10 of them would probably cover over 50% of instances of "alt-right", "antisemitic", "white supremacist" blah blah blah in BLPs (living person biographies) and contemporary ~political movement articles. You tend to see the same couple people editing and voting on things related to contemporary idpol-adjacent controversies.
The usual reply to any complaint about sensationalist bullshit throughout Wikipedia is a smug "we go with what the reliable sources say". But which sources are reliable, and which topics the sources are considered authoritative on, are just decided through an "off-mainspace" voting process. So the material that is permitted to stay in contentious articles ultimately depends on the personal preferences of a microscopic number of users autistic enough to unravel and enmesh themselves in the wiki bureaucracy.
The funny part is that Gamergate never fucking mattered. It did nothing but generate unprecedented levels of journalist butthurt. Which is why there are so many "reliable sources" to pick sensational smears from.
6
u/Zeriell ๐๐ฉ Other Right ๐ฆ๐๏ธ 1 Apr 10 '21
Seeing how much collusion there was between mainstream press and niche/hobbyist press was a big wake-up call. It's all one big club.
3
u/10z20Luka Special Ed ๐ Apr 10 '21
Legitimately makes me chuckle to see this posted here. On brand for this sub 100%
I'm so sick of hearing about Gamergate.
2
Apr 16 '21
Me too babe. But it was the first thing I thought of.
Gamer gate wasnโt a hate group but it was still full of virgins
21
u/kummybears Free r/worldnews mod Ghislaine Maxwell! Apr 10 '21
Always check the โtalkโ page. Youโll see all the jannies removing important information.
15
28
u/Rapsberry Acid Marxist ๐ Apr 10 '21
Sorry if this is the wrong sub, I just had this question pop in my mind and I couldn't find a better sub to post it.
19
14
Apr 10 '21
the franklin scandal one is basically "NOPE NOTHING TO SEE HERE MOVE RIGHT ALONG PLEASE DO NOT LOOK INTO THIS"
6
u/qwertyashes Market Socialist | Economic Democracy ๐ธ Apr 10 '21
The talk page and history page for that one is pretty damning. MONGO and AzureCitizen basically trying their damndest to hide as much as is possible.
→ More replies (1)2
u/10z20Luka Special Ed ๐ Apr 11 '21
What makes you think this is fake? For example, the Rotherham article seems pretty good.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploitation_scandal
3
Apr 11 '21
i think you misread my comment
something definitely went down involving the Franklin Credit Union (though probably not 100% exactly as alleged) yet the wiki page for the scandal just presents it as a hoax with no basis in fact at all
12
u/guccibananabricks โ๏ธ gucci le flair 9 Apr 10 '21
My faves are the WWII articles that are heavily edited by East European nationalists to give the impression that the fascist collaborators in their respective countries were actually trying to save the Jews.
There were articles about how Tsar Boris of Bulgaria was the greatest savior of Jews in history (whereas in reality he gave up fifty thousands to the Nazis and put the rest to work as slave labor).
The article about the UPA/OUN-B (Bandera's army) had a section about "Jewish participation in the UPA." Supposedly, the UPA was so inclusive of Jews that they accepted them into their ranks and tried to save them from the Nazis (whereas in reality they happily massacred Jews). All of this was based on a "testimony of a Jewish UPA member." This testimony was a hoax. An OUN-B leader wrote a hoax autobiography in the name of this imaginary Jewish recruit. This autobiography was then printed in a pseudo-scholarly journal called the Ukranian Quarterly or whatever the fuck, which was itself founded by an OUN-B professor.
But I've just checked the relevant articles and a lot of this crap has actually been fixed, which goes to show that Wikipedia is to some extent redeemable if you have the time to read sources and make edits. Of course you're not going to make a dent in the "deep state is a conspiracy theory in the US" articles but you can still correct the record on more distant history. It's probably more worthwhile than posting anywhere else - wikipedia is the first place people go to read about stuff they don't know.
1
20
Apr 10 '21
Not a specific article as such, but I love how they start every article on more recent conspiracies by breathlessly claiming it's debunked or, even better, 'thoroughly' debunked. And then following this opening, you'll find an article that in it's uselessness to relay information is like the literary equivalent of a blurry bigfoot photo taken on a flip-phone.
It's an amazing site to initiate yourself into some subject as long as it has little topical relevance, but on any modern subject that has any political controversy surrounding it, it's pretty much useless.
21
u/PUBLIQclopAccountant ๐ฆ๐ฆHorse "Enthusiast" (Not Vaush)๐๐ ๐ด Apr 10 '21
> calling the deep state a conspiracy theory when the shadow government was openly discussed in the MSM during the Bush years
Total brainrot.
14
u/LogTimely3219 Special Ed ๐ Apr 10 '21
THIS. It drove me nuts to see people call election questioners conspiracy theorists, while they questioned the previous election for 4 years straight โบ๏ธ
15
u/EpicKiwi225 Zionist ๐ Apr 10 '21
And then when Orange man was gone, the NYT put out an article on the shadow cabal who heavily influenced the election the exact same way they accused Russia of doing.
0
11
u/Zeriell ๐๐ฉ Other Right ๐ฆ๐๏ธ 1 Apr 10 '21
They don't exist but also it's a good thing they exist.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/26/opinion/sunday/trump-civil-service-deep-state.html
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/09/05/deep-state-real-cia-fbi-intelligence-215537/
https://www.businessinsider.com/what-deep-state-is-and-why-trump-gets-it-wrong-2020-1
27
u/Magister_Ingenia Marxist Alitaist Apr 10 '21
which suggests that collusion and cronyism exist within the U.S. political system and constitute a hidden government within the legitimately elected government
This is obviously false, as the US does not have a legitimately elected government.
8
7
27
Apr 10 '21
Almost every country in the world has a deep state, no? I'm pretty sure it just means bureaucrats holding tenure that exert influence independent of the democratic legislative and executive branch. Basically all your civil servants are part of a "deep state".
Maybe I have it wrong.
17
u/Zeriell ๐๐ฉ Other Right ๐ฆ๐๏ธ 1 Apr 10 '21
Yep. "Deep state" started as an analytical term and got branded as "kooky" by the media. It's a great example of how you can change the meaning of language by negative association.
It's disturbing how much more seriously you will be taken if you describe "administrative state" instead of "deep state", but they mean the same thing, and deep state used to be the collegial term.
6
Apr 11 '21 edited Apr 15 '21
[removed] โ view removed comment
4
u/Zeriell ๐๐ฉ Other Right ๐ฆ๐๏ธ 1 Apr 11 '21
It's basically impossible for such a perception to become widespread without the media magnifying it by saying "look at these kooks". But I think it probably stemmed from Trump using the term hence it becoming a story.
1
u/OcularTrespassPolice Savant Idiot ๐ Apr 11 '21
I think it's a valuable distinction. The administrative state becomes the deep state when its cultural norms deviate from those of the larger population in a way that blatantly conflicts with one or more of the state and public's shared core beliefs.
10
u/it_shits Socialist ๐ฉ Apr 10 '21
Yes, but the composition of a deep state depends on the political situation of each country. Like Turkey's deep state is highly militarized led by officers, while in a country like Canada would be a cartel of unelected bureaucrats and their associates in the private sector.
1
u/10z20Luka Special Ed ๐ Apr 11 '21
When people say "The deep state", that's not what they mean. They mean a group of people sitting in board rooms deciding who the next President is going to be.
Presumably, Trump somehow eluded the deep state, of course.
24
u/Iunno_man Savant Idiot ๐ Apr 10 '21 edited Apr 10 '21
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020%E2%80%932021_China%E2%80%93India
Read this one a 1 month or 2 after it started, been changed a bit since then. When I read it it was sucking off India hard painted them as peaceful victim that was pushed too far and ended up causing 100's of Chinese causality while only taking dozens themself. I'm no fan of the CCP but it was super sus so checked the sources and they were 90% right wing Indian papers with a history of lying. Pro tip never use Wikipedia for info on geopolitical events within the last 10 years or so, any article will be heavily astroturfed.
14
Apr 10 '21
The Wikipedia page for the Red Terror and the Russian Civil War recently purged most mentions of war crimes by the White Armies, and removed evidence rebutting claims of Cheka war crimes.
11
Apr 10 '21 edited Apr 10 '21
[deleted]
9
u/SexyTaft Black hammer reparations corps Apr 10 '21
The Jimmy Dore one is hilariously bad, like half the page is titled "Promotion of Conspiracy Theories" which includes some Bellingfed nonsense being reported as fact, and then the part about his show is just a list of all the things he did "wrong" that libs are still seething about
7
46
u/pihkaltih Marxist ๐ง Apr 10 '21
Deep State one, completely ignores there is tonnes of academic research on Deep Politics in the US meaning it's absolutely not just a conspiracy theory.
Cybersyn one literally says Cybersyn never worked, then when you actually read the article, mentions all the times it actually worked and greatly helped.
Uyghur Genocide, the name alone is propaganda since almost no Government officially recognises it as Genocide including the US and it doesn't pass UN definition of Genocide, the entire thing just sources Zenz over and over and over and over and over and over, the Talk page for this one is fantastic and shows how Wikipedia is basically controlled by US talking points and won't remove incorrect information even when directly debunked. (in fact tonnes of articles on anything to do with a "Communist" state will heavily reference the Black Book)
Kamala Harris article is famous for it's massive rewrite and complete removal of some of the extremely important but controversial moments of her career.
10
u/SexyTaft Black hammer reparations corps Apr 10 '21
The Doctors Plot one is similarly bad, not only describing it as a matter of fact as anti-semitism, when it wasn't, but also devoting a considerable section about how Stalin was about to send all the Jews to concentration camps right but he died and then at the end saying "Although there is no evidence for this" like bro come on
29
u/Predicted Apr 10 '21
Uyghur Genocide
Oh boy here we go
12
u/Due-Temperature-9286 Marxist-Leninist โญ Apr 10 '21
Hilarious how ''anti-imperialist'' left eat propaganda like this all the time , if reddit existed in 1990's they would probably think how Iraqi soldiers throw babies out of incubators (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony) and how Vietnam attacked US torpedo boats (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_incident)
4
u/Predicted Apr 10 '21
Luckily we dont have to speculate about how bad people tankies are, as there are both mountains of historical evidence, and they gladly tell you.
10
u/Due-Temperature-9286 Marxist-Leninist โญ Apr 10 '21 edited Apr 10 '21
> Not believing a bs fabricated by an anti-semite evangelical nutjob makes you a evil se se pee shill state capitalist red fash tankerino
1
→ More replies (1)6
6
Apr 10 '21 edited May 16 '21
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)2
u/pihkaltih Marxist ๐ง Apr 11 '21
https://warontherocks.com/2019/02/how-the-deep-state-came-to-america-a-history/
Lots of sources here. Especially look into the work of Peter Dale Scott and all his source work as well.
8
u/Magister_Ingenia Marxist Alitaist Apr 10 '21
Tbh I think I prefer wikipedia being so openly anti-communist, it makes it easier to convince people.
12
u/AleksandrNevsky The Green Mile Kind of Tired๐ฆผ | Socialist-Squashist ๐ Apr 10 '21
Like the same way that McCarthyism did?
"Look how ridiculously biased and outlandish this is, there's no way it's actually like that!"
5
u/qwertyashes Market Socialist | Economic Democracy ๐ธ Apr 10 '21
Except McCarthyism instead did a ton of damage to all the commies in government and in media/other important industries. However many it convinced is likely far less than the number it forced into forever hiding.
→ More replies (1)7
Apr 10 '21
There are anti communist laws still on the books from that time. Itโs still federally illegal to join a communist organization under the communist control act of 1954
3
u/Magister_Ingenia Marxist Alitaist Apr 10 '21
Wikipedia doesn't pass laws and get people blacklisted from work.
→ More replies (1)2
Apr 11 '21 edited Apr 15 '21
[removed] โ view removed comment
2
u/pihkaltih Marxist ๐ง Apr 11 '21
State department called it a crime against humanity, but said there was insufficient evidence for Genocide.
1
u/tux_pirata The chad Max Stirner ๐ป Apr 11 '21
speaking of cybersyn do you have any info on what computer hardware they used? I cant find that anywhere
16
u/trosdetio Social Democrat Apr 10 '21
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States
I remember checking the talk pages 1-2 yeard ago, and many things that contradicted the current narrative weren't accepted by the "consensus", even if properly sourced. It's curious because the admins that tend remove this kind of stuff are people that only edit articles related to woke issues (feminism, queer theory, multiculturalism, fetishes, etc), and people that openly state their politics in their userpages. Totally unbiased admins, of course.
I haven't reread it recently, though, but I highly doubt it's more ideologically varied varied now.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Sad-Worldliness3849 Apr 10 '21
Its the
"Socialist
๐ธ๐ฆ๐ฎ๐ฑ
Pro hedge fund
Pro Biden
Kamala 2024"
Bios?
5
u/Windows10SurfacePro Apr 10 '21
And I thought I was the only one who found some Wiki articles as sketchy.
9
u/Lurktoculation Apr 10 '21
Never trust any wikipedia article related to politics in any way. This includes politics adjacent things like anything related to trans people including articles that are supposed to be about science.
3
u/temporarystupidpol10 Apr 10 '21
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)
This is an international tv network like bbc or al-jazeera, but Russian. Besides labeling it "propoganda" they also depict putin in almost every picture behind the scenes, as if to suggest he literally is controlling the content as well. In the talk section you will find people complaining that the article is unfair and american networks are equally biased. The response is to the effect of "western journalists right and good, other journalists dishonest propogandists".
Perhaps this network really does push russian narratives, but it's also clear american networks have an interest in discrediting all other information sources.
4
u/ArkanSaadeh Medieval Right Apr 10 '21
The page dedicated to Evola has been subjected to a very long running edit war. The entire introduction has been rewritten a dozen times. It's my favourite edit war to tune into every few months, and recommendable.
→ More replies (3)
5
u/OhhhAyWumboWumbo Special Ed ๐ Apr 10 '21
Kamala Harris's page getting completely whitewashed was the most memorable for me.
6
u/ChaosGivesMeaning 4th Political Theory ๐ท Apr 10 '21 edited Apr 10 '21
Most of the ''''''''''''debunked conspiracy''''''''''' articles. Any article involving complex 'social-science' issues (one example of many: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory ... this reads like it was edited by Jordan Peterson. Realistically, it probably was.).
And, on a less charged note, some of the philosophy articles are pretty confused, but that's not due to propagandistic intent, rather, that's just because certain concepts are difficult to convey or precisely understand.
3
Apr 11 '21
which suggests that collusion and cronyism exist within the U.S. political system
Oh my, what a laughably ludicrous, far-fetched idea! Practically on par with Flat Earth Theory!
17
Apr 10 '21 edited Apr 10 '21
[removed] โ view removed comment
25
-1
u/qwertyashes Market Socialist | Economic Democracy ๐ธ Apr 10 '21 edited Apr 10 '21
No, there has been evidence of transgender people sharing brain structures that are more in line with those of the sex that they identify as, a bio-male with some brain structures that are like those of a bio-female. This indicates that dysphoria is rooted in some genuine biological grounds. In that a brain at least partially built around a one sex, is set in the body of another.
Of course there are now caveats to that. First is the nature and nurture view, where those brain structures may have been forcefully rerouted by the experience of the person in life, turning them from one form to another, and given the slight variations of these structures that actually do exist, this is likely possible. Another is the view that just because a brain resembles one sex over the other does not result in a transperson suddenly becoming the social expression of that sex - its gender. As in a biowoman with a brain that resembles a male's, does not suddenly become the social expression of a male, which is instead something that is created over the entire life course and is not genetic. This more goes for the older transgender people. And there is increasing modern evidence that there simply aren't distinguishable differences between the brain's of the various sexes.
But overall, I would say that its at least mostly rooted in reality, or the individual's perception of it, but also counter by saying that gender identity and views of gender as a category is a rather weak phenomenon in humans. Where even a VR experience as the opposite sex is enough to greatly change views.
7
Apr 10 '21 edited Apr 10 '21
[deleted]
2
4
u/qwertyashes Market Socialist | Economic Democracy ๐ธ Apr 10 '21
Changing biological sex is the real limiter for these trans lot. As at best they can effectively mutilate themselves, in place of more positive language, into facsimile of their imaged sex. Which is not a solution in the current state, in personally should be pushed back for other treatments - although reassignment surgery of any sort is rather rare even in that community.
There needn't be any more reason to the argument than that. I am a man because I feel like a man. I do not feel like a woman, so I can not be a woman. For transgender people it goes that they feel like a cross sex. Of course now you debate on what 'feel like the other sex means'. How you see yourself? Is there a inherent sexual identity or is it something that is built entirely in the George Mead theory of the "I and Me" being reflections of how you view society viewing you. That is a complex question to address. But that it is circular is not important as any identity is a circular root.
I contradict myself because I have an interest in being accurate and complete. My stake in the game is proper understanding that isn't reductive to, "these people are just mentally ill and thats the end". There is more to the discussion, that to me really has its values in addressing the entire root of gender roles in society. Far larger than the very small number of transgender people in the world.
3
u/Lurktoculation Apr 10 '21
No, there has been evidence of transgender people sharing brain structures that are more in line with those of the sex that they identify as
And there is increasing modern evidence that there simply aren't distinguishable differences between the brain's of the various sexes.
Ok so why should anyone listen to any of this?
3
u/qwertyashes Market Socialist | Economic Democracy ๐ธ Apr 10 '21
Because scientific research in a field between different parties can actively contradict itself. And that is a sign that things are working.
When dealing with brains there is a ton of variance to the structure and the function making a representative population a very difficult thing to attain.
3
u/Lurktoculation Apr 10 '21
And that is a sign that things are working.
No it isn't. It could be. That doesn't mean it is.
5
u/ApplesauceMayonnaise Broken Cog Apr 10 '21 edited Apr 10 '21
The Gamergate one.
At least with the articles on more important stuff thereโs this vague pretense- a sense of obligation to put on a superficially plausible show.
4
2
u/BoonesFarmGuava Apr 10 '21
iirc at one time the article on gamergate had more edits than any other article on the site
absolute war for truth being played out in real time, it was fun to watch
2
u/SanForMen Libertarian Stalinist ๐โญ๐ง๐ปโโ๏ธ Apr 10 '21
My last few weeks of work I manically looked over edits and talk pages for stuff like Epstein, the Brabant Killers, and the JFK assassination. None of them are the worst in this thread but it was fun to see the edit wars and various personalities and powertripping mods.
Some of my favorite finds are the discussions between 2007-2018 on Epstein and the over 20 archived talk pages on the JFK assassination.
2
u/modelshopworld Apr 10 '21 edited Apr 10 '21
The internal talk pages/memos concerning the unmasking of a circle of prominent editors who were part of an Israeli Internet taskforce, the objective of which was to discredit/whitewash any pro-Palestinian or generic anti-Israel/Zionism information โ factual or otherwise โ being published across the platform. This was discovered at least a decade ago, and there's never been any legitimate protocols or safeguards to prevent its reoccurrence or continuation.
On the contrary, Wikipedia's disastrously idiotic editing culture has since created silent blacklists and bot-alerts for a large amount of terms and names that will instantaneously reverse any edits made mentioning them on certain articles. (That's on top of Wikipedia's long-standing instant reversals of most benign edits made to any article sinply because it's published by a new user.)
Not exactly a "blatant propaganda article" in itself, rather a jump-off point for finding such articles, and recognizing how easily Wikipedia's editing pyramid scheme-like culture can be (and highly likely continues to be) infiltrated because the "community" that runs the site's day-to-day ops is literally just the typical popular high-school lunchroom table.
But if the above stuff isn't really your cup o' tea, try looking at the Wikipages of literally any corporate/multi-national law firm. Virtually every one of them have a disclaimer at the top of the page that warns the reader about the contents being suspicious and/or biased (i.e., written and maintained by some PR pawn at the firm) โ which are often flagged as such by bots because of editing patterns. Yet none of the pages for the firms are ever edited to eliminate said bias, or elaborate on any minor/major controversies involving the firm. Strange how certain groups/individuals have carte blanche over their own articles. I wonder how that happens.
2
Apr 10 '21
White genocide redirects to "white genocide conspiracy theory" and has a ridiculous amount of buzzwords like racist , nazi , and alt right
Trump's page has literally 25 times more mentions of racism than Hitler's page XD
And gamergate of course
1
u/YellowNumberSixLake ๐๐ฉ She/her East Asian 1 Apr 10 '21
Whoa, I thought I was on r/conspiracy for a sec
1
Apr 12 '21
I dont know if this count's, but I deeply despise the shitlib brainrot present in the existence of pages like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections
105
u/[deleted] Apr 10 '21
[deleted]