←back to thread

Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

(www.washingtonpost.com)
767 points coloneltcb | 2 comments | 25 Apr 25 23:03 UTC | HN request time: 0.431s | source
Show context
mjrpes ◴[25 Apr 25 23:54 UTC] No.43799593[source]▶
Here's the letter: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ocNyx34Et19sKtlta0bTPPzSPcp...

No claims, no evidence. No sources, except "it has come to my attention" and "information received by my office".

replies(5): >>43799650 #>>43799855 #>>43800768 #>>43801411 #>>43802931 #
dxroshan ◴[26 Apr 25 03:47 UTC] No.43800768[source]▶
What is happening is very scary. Many people don't seem to care about any evidence or sources. They blindly follow whatever lies that their leaders say. I think this has been the case at anytime in history. However, now, with the internet, it is easy to spread such lies to mass and easy for such leaders to make blind followers.
replies(2): >>43801742 #>>43802735 #
1. rnd0 ◴[26 Apr 25 07:57 UTC] No.43801742[source]▶
Clearly people care very deeply about sources and evidence -and they're attacking things (wikipedia, various gov websites) which can be used as objective sources.

If you don't have objective sources, it's easier to lead people around by the nose -hence the attack.

replies(1): >>43803369 #
2. 93po ◴[26 Apr 25 13:20 UTC] No.43803369[source]▶
Here's the root of the problem though: wikipedia isn't an objective source by its very nature. Wikipedia requires mainstream established news sources for a lot of articles that aren't academic in nature, and especially for articles about people. You cannot include information that isn't supported by corporate news articles, which means corporate news is now the arbiter of truth, and corporate news lies all the time about everything.

Wikipedia is, and always has been, the encyclopedia of the elite and billionaire narrative, and especially the left-wing narrative, which dominates nearly all corporate news groups. I say this as a far left person myself.