Der Große Krieg um die Müllhalde Wikipedia wird immer bizarrer. Jetzt gibt es ein Video, das in Reichswichtelkreisen herumgereicht wird als Beweis für die Schweinereien in der Wikipedia: Larry Sanger, einer der Gründe der Müllhalde, sagt, daß böse Leute in der Wikipedia mitmischen.
So isses halt: Wenn man selbst am Ruder ist und ScheiBe reinschmeißen kann, ist alles in bester Ordnung. Wenn aber ANDERE ebenfalls ScheiBe reinschmeißen, also wirklich, DAS geht natürlich nicht!
Wikipedia ist ScheiBe und war noch niemals etwas anderes als ScheiBe.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F2xs6LMWQAAd0CB?format=jpg&name=smallhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YR6dO8U8okk[*quote*]
System Update with Glenn Greenwald
308 videos
19:09 / 19:14
Wikipedia Co-Founder Condemns It: “Most Biased Encyclopedia” in History | SYSTEM UPDATE
Glenn Greenwald
156K subscribers
33,699 views Aug 1, 2023
This is a clip from our show SYSTEM UPDATE, now airing every weeknight at 7pm ET on Rumble. You can watch the full episode for FREE here:
https://rumble.com/v33nemd-system-upd...
Now available as a podcast! Find full episodes here:
https://linktr.ee/systemupdate_Join us LIVE on Rumble, weeknights at 7pm ET:
https://rumble.com/c/GGreenwaldBecome part of our Locals community:
https://greenwald.locals.com/Follow Glenn:
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/ggreenwaldInstagram:
https://www.instagram.com/glenn.11.gr...
Follow System Update:
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/SystemUpdate_Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/systemupdat...
TikTok:
https://www.tiktok.com/@systemupdate__Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/systemupdate...
LinkedIn:
https://www.linkedin.com/company/syst...
Glenn Greenwald
156K subscribers
Videos
About
426 Comments
Transcript
0:00
[Music]
0:01
foreign
0:02
[Music]
0:06
I've always seen some things in there
0:08
that were a little tenuous maybe a
0:11
little bit factually imperfect but it
0:13
seemed for a long time like there was
0:15
generally an effort made to more or less
0:17
get the facts right about what was
0:19
included in my page
0:21
and I would say I really started
0:23
noticing things gone completely awry
0:26
when I really started to have what was
0:29
perceived to be a breach with the
0:33
political faction with which I had long
0:34
been Associated at least in the public
0:36
mind which was kind of American
0:37
liberalism even the American lab
0:39
surrounding my skepticism toward
0:41
russiagate my disagreement with how
0:43
Donald Trump was being characterized
0:45
this kind of notion that he was this
0:47
unprecedented evil and that everything
0:49
and anything was justified in the name
0:50
of stopping him and I kind of became an
0:52
opponent of the liberal establishment
0:54
and its orthodoxies and tactics and what
0:56
I began to notice was that
0:59
things that were on my Wikipedia page
1:01
for over a decade with no change things
1:03
about events in my life from 10 20 30
1:06
years ago that had never been altered
1:09
suddenly every sentence became a war to
1:12
try and insert negative insinuations or
1:15
all kinds of innuendo all sorts of
1:17
incredibly tendentious characteristic
1:19
you know characteristics and
1:20
descriptions about my work that were
1:22
designed to be negative to the point
1:23
where my entire page became an
1:25
ideological war
1:27
because of the fact that my perceived
1:30
political place in the ecosystem had
1:32
shifted and I then began looking more
1:34
into how Wikipedia functions and saw
1:37
that some of these pages are written I
1:40
mean we went through a couple of them
1:41
only and you can find you know thousands
1:43
of examples where it doesn't even seem
1:47
like they're pretending anymore or
1:48
trying to pretend to any neutrality I'm
1:52
just wondering like when did you start
1:54
noticing that it was that extreme and
1:56
and if you could talk about some of the
1:58
ways that that is accomplished
2:01
okay well it is very gradual it's a
2:05
really really hard to put a particular
2:09
date on it I first noticed that it was
2:14
it was taking a really over the top
2:18
biased point of view on
2:21
um when it shifted from the neutral
2:24
point of view to a I guess I would call
2:26
it a scientistic point of view on on any
2:30
sort of controversial issues in science
2:33
The Establishment view on that topic was
2:37
was uh pushed very heavily that happened
2:40
like in I don't know 2006 2008
2:44
um so the global warming articles and
2:47
and articles about
2:51
certain drugs and whatnot
2:54
um would have would have been changed
2:57
back then
2:59
um and then I I started noticing around
3:01
2010 to 2015 that
3:06
um
3:07
that articles on like Eastern medicine
3:11
holistic medicine which I'm not a big
3:13
fan of or anything but they were so
3:17
obviously biased using in as you've
3:21
noticed in your excellent
3:22
monologue opening
3:25
um that that
3:27
um you know that they would use these
3:29
dismissive epithets you know uh about
3:33
these ancient Traditions that you know
3:36
even though I disagree with them if I
3:38
were writing an encyclopedia article
3:40
obviously you wouldn't do that if
3:44
there'd be a separate section maybe
3:46
about you know Western Reception of of
3:50
these ideas and whatnot
3:52
anyway and then um I think it really
3:56
became it really got over the top
3:58
in in the teens like between
4:03
2013 and 2018 and by by at the time
4:06
Trump
4:08
became president
4:10
it um
4:12
yeah it was almost as bad as it is now
4:17
um and it's uh it's amazing you know it
4:21
no encyclopedia to my knowledge has been
4:24
as biased as Wikipedia has been I mean
4:28
that's saying something
4:30
um I remember being mad about
4:33
Encyclopedia Britannica and and like the
4:36
world book
4:38
um not mentioning my favorite topics
4:41
um in in
4:43
um you know presenting only certain
4:45
points of view in a way that you know
4:47
establishment sources generally do
4:51
um but this is something else this is
4:53
entirely different it's over the top
4:56
so you know I think one of the the
5:00
reasons why at least to me you know I
5:02
sometimes I I like for me when I was
5:04
putting the show together I was talking
5:05
to my my team you know I was kind of
5:08
saying like on some level it seems like
5:09
you could just read these pages and
5:11
you're just like read the page about how
5:13
they talk about the Ukraine and Biden
5:16
scandal which obviously people can
5:18
disagree on in terms of what the
5:19
evidence demonstrates but to just simply
5:21
declare outright at the start that it's
5:24
replete with lies it's a conspiracy
5:25
theory it's only designed to undermine
5:27
Joe Biden or especially the debate over
5:30
the covet pandemic which simply takes
5:32
the side of the establishment and Dr
5:34
falchi in a way that not even they would
5:39
Express with such certainty in terms of
5:41
the truth about what we know about
5:43
covid's Origins that that would almost
5:46
be sufficient because I grew up as
5:48
somebody who in a school would look to
5:50
encyclopedias you know the pre-internet
5:52
encyclopedias and the difference between
5:54
in tone is so obvious and one one of the
5:57
one of the hypothesis that I have and
6:00
I'm wondering what you think about this
6:01
is I was comparing earlier the
6:04
trajectory of Wikipedia to a lot of the
6:06
trends in corporate media and to me what
6:09
seems to be the case is that in a lot of
6:11
ways the emergence of Donald Trump
6:14
kind of changed everything as you say it
6:17
was really gradual it was you can go
6:18
back before that when kind of the Tea
6:20
Party Movement was emerging in the ears
6:23
of Obama and people started getting a
6:25
lot more polarized but to me it seems
6:27
like what ended up happening was the
6:29
liberal establishment narrative was that
6:31
Donald Trump was such a once in a
6:33
lifetime unprecedented Menace
6:36
that there's no longer anything that can
6:39
exist independent of ideology and
6:42
political viewpoints that even truth has
6:45
to be subservient to the more important
6:47
cause of attacking Donald Trump and the
6:51
movement that formed around him and a
6:55
lot of the conventions of Journalism
6:56
have been completely passed aside within
6:59
a very short period of time the idea
7:00
that you don't editorialize as part of
7:03
narrative the the argument is really now
7:05
that if you don't editorialize
7:07
constantly and from the start you're
7:09
failing in your job as a journalist that
7:11
journalism requires you to constantly
7:13
describe Trump as an authoritarian and
7:16
Biden as a decent man otherwise you're
7:19
not telling the truth and it seems like
7:22
a very similar thing has happened in
7:24
Wikipedia which is supposed to be an
7:26
encyclopedia devoted to truth that the
7:29
premise seems to be that you don't have
7:31
truth anymore independent of ideological
7:33
Outlook
7:34
all right I think well I think you've
7:37
hit it on the nose that doesn't really
7:39
explain that describes what the problem
7:40
is in other words they take their their
7:43
cues so it it definitely explains it at
7:46
one level right
7:48
um that the the rank and file
7:50
wikipedians
7:52
um they take their cues not from you
7:55
know uh Wikipedia's original neutrality
7:58
policy or anything like that they don't
8:00
care about that at all
8:02
um they take their cues from from
8:04
basically uh the CNN and MSNBC and the
8:08
New York Times and whatever they
8:11
um whatever those Outlets feel
8:15
comfortable saying
8:18
um and one also has to remember that
8:22
they have uh declared
8:25
uh like 80 percent of the major sources
8:31
of of news
8:34
um on the on the right
8:37
um to to be unreliable officially that's
8:40
it's it's in their policy at this point
8:43
a lot of people don't realize that but
8:45
it's true and that really really colors
8:48
the um the Articles and and what uh what
8:54
the editors allow the Articles to say
8:56
but that the deeper explanation I think
9:01
is
9:02
um and I I'm I guess I'm gonna offer a
9:05
conspiracy theory now
9:07
um that uh essentially
9:11
um I think that the left it's it's not a
9:15
big conspira everybody knows and
9:16
believes this right the left very very
9:20
deliberately seeks out to to uh take
9:25
control
9:26
um except it isn't just the left we're
9:28
learning that now aren't we right but
9:30
this this
9:32
um Gray Zone um example that you that
9:35
you uh point out no it's it's uh The
9:39
Establishment yep
9:40
and and they have their own uh agenda
9:45
I'm not going to try to
9:48
um try to
9:50
offer any opinions because I it's not
9:53
something that I study as to how they
9:56
bring that about but it's clear that
9:59
that
10:00
um between 2005 and 2015 it was on their
10:05
radar Wikipedia moved on to the
10:08
establishment's radar and we of course
10:11
we do have evidence that that the CIA
10:14
even as early as I think was it Virgil
10:17
Griffiths discovered this in 2008 I
10:21
think something like that that the CIA
10:23
and the FBI computers were used to edit
10:26
Wikipedia I think they stopped doing
10:28
that back then no
10:32
um and uh and not just them right we
10:36
know that that uh intelligence now a
10:39
great part of intelligence
10:42
um is and and information Warfare is
10:45
conducted online and where if not on
10:49
websites like Wikipedia right so that
10:52
they pay off the most influential people
10:55
to push their agendas which they're
10:58
already mostly in in line with or they
11:00
or they just developed their own Talent
11:03
within the community learned the
11:04
Wikipedia game and then you know push
11:08
the uh what they want to say within
11:13
um with with their own people
11:15
so um that's that's my uh that's my take
11:18
on that yeah I think the point you raise
11:21
is a crucial one it's one I emphasize so
11:23
often which is I really do believe now
11:24
that the most relevant metric for
11:27
understanding the world and it's
11:28
certainly how people are treated is not
11:30
so much left versus right but
11:33
anti-establishment versus subservient to
11:35
The Establishment and ultimately there
11:38
are people who are more conservative who
11:40
are very much aligned with establishment
11:42
politics David from and Jeffrey Goldberg
11:44
the two examples we use didn't get more
11:46
liberal over the years they just became
11:48
useful to The Establishment in a way
11:51
that some people on the left like Gray
11:52
Zone and I would put even RFK Jr who's
11:55
harder to find ideologically but there's
11:57
certainly a lot of left-wing views that
11:58
he has he's running to Biden's left on
12:00
the question of whether we should be
12:01
aggressive toward China
12:02
certainly whether uh people what what
12:06
the whether we should be supporting the
12:08
CIA in the military industrial complex
12:10
and things like uh Ukraine and more than
12:14
anything though he's considered an enemy
12:15
of the establishment let me just ask you
12:17
about uh as one of the last questions
12:18
this the role of Google and all this
12:21
I mean I think this is kind of the key
12:23
and I wonder it's for me it's kind of a
12:25
chicken and egg question I'm wondering
12:26
if you can shed some light on it
12:28
obviously Google is a major part of why
12:30
Wikipedia has grown significantly in
12:33
terms of its impact
12:34
is it that Wikipedia that Google saw the
12:38
potential of Wikipedia to become this
12:40
kind of authoritative Uber authoritative
12:42
Source in the internet and decided to
12:44
kind of grab it Pump It Up in order to
12:46
be able to influence it or was Wikipedia
12:48
already growing into becoming that and
12:52
so Google decided Well let's kind of
12:55
ride with it and see if we can kind of
12:56
redirect it and help control it
13:00
I mean look I I am not an expert on on
13:05
um the inner workings of Google
13:08
um or for that matter of Wikipedia after
13:11
I left so
13:13
um what you say is is very plausible
13:16
um I wouldn't be at all surprised if
13:18
that were true
13:20
um but uh to be honest I I don't know
13:24
what I do know is that Google has
13:27
donated millions of dollars to
13:30
um to Wikipedia over the years Google
13:33
has much more importantly pushed
13:36
Wikipedia articles
13:38
um and uh in so far as people who are in
13:44
Google or advising Google investing in
13:47
Google want
13:49
um the public to believe certain things
13:52
as long as Wikipedia is saying those
13:55
things then then those articles are
13:58
going to tend to be to push to the top
14:00
so what we need to do I I have to get
14:04
this in what we need to do is to reach
14:08
into the long tail of all the other
14:10
encyclopedias there are other
14:11
encyclopedias you know there are um
14:14
there's a law can you talk about them I
14:16
know you were involved with one and are
14:18
involved with one there are a couple of
14:19
Alternatives that have a different model
14:20
can you just talk people through that
14:24
a few
14:25
um uh a a a good uh explicitly neutral
14:30
Encyclopedia of American politics is
14:33
called ballot pedia it's really good
14:36
um and uh ballot Peter articles They
14:40
Don't Really rank very highly on Google
14:43
in my experience
14:45
um let's see although they can they can
14:48
um let's see what else well on on uh the
14:52
the right there is conserve opinion and
14:55
on on the left there is what rational
14:57
Wiki oh that's really bad but anyway
14:59
there's an example there's a lot of
15:01
others anyway besides Wikipedia and Well
15:06
if you really want to uh see them
15:09
um and search all of them at once I
15:12
would say go to
15:14
encyclosearch.org or
15:17
encycloreader.org and um what my
15:20
organization now is doing is collecting
15:24
free encyclopedia articles from as many
15:28
sources as as we can it takes time to to
15:33
um to set up new uh encyclopedias to be
15:37
to be crawled or at least to be
15:39
um gradually absorbed which is what we
15:42
do
15:43
um but we have uh 35 and growing uh
15:48
encyclopedias
15:50
um in the system and we are creating a
15:53
an open and free database and network of
15:58
encyclopedias essentially Wikipedia is
16:01
part of it so necessarily it's going to
16:04
be greater than Wikipedia because it's
16:05
going to include Wikipedia but a lot
16:08
more
16:09
and um
16:11
if you want to uh have an experience of
16:16
um you know comparing
16:18
real relatively old-fashioned
16:21
encyclopedias with
16:24
um really uh
16:27
so biased as to be twisted Wikipedia
16:30
articles I think it would that would be
16:33
a good place to start and cyclo a cycle
16:36
reader and in cyclist search
16:39
um and and by the way the software that
16:40
that we are using to um to aggregate
16:45
these articles
16:47
is all open source you can spin up your
16:51
own aggregator and uh and and the the uh
16:55
all of the articles are digitally signed
16:58
which means that we can prove if
17:01
somebody has tampered with them
17:03
essentially
17:05
um so this is this is our our we're
17:07
trying to strike a blow against
17:10
censorship and control of information
17:13
by simply making it easier to find the
17:17
all the other encyclopedias that are out
17:20
there and also well we've got uh very
17:22
soon like within a couple of weeks
17:25
um there will be a WordPress plugin
17:28
where people can push articles that they
17:30
write on their own blog so all across
17:33
the on the web to the encyclosphere and
17:37
then it will appear in
17:39
um I think we're up to four different
17:42
aggregators at this point
17:44
well we will definitely continue to
17:45
follow the work that you're doing I mean
17:47
of course the problem is that Google
17:48
controls with such a Stranglehold the
17:51
most valuable real estate on the
17:53
internet and sometimes of course that is
17:55
the great challenges kind of wrestling
17:57
control of the full information away
17:59
from these big tech companies but if
18:01
there's anything for which I have
18:03
solidarity and empathy it's somebody who
18:05
is a co-founder of an organization who
18:07
thinks they're creating something in
18:09
order to advance certain values and then
18:11
looks at what their creation has become
18:13
and sees it being the exact opposite of
18:15
what they think they're creating and I
18:17
know from experience that is sometimes
18:19
difficult to denounce something of which
18:21
you're the co-founder because it's part
18:22
of your legacy you want it to be
18:24
something that you're proud of you want
18:26
it to be something that made a positive
18:27
contribution in the world and I think
18:28
the fact that you've been willing to
18:29
step up for so long and be a Critic of
18:32
this thing that you played such a vital
18:34
role in creating requires a lot of
18:35
courage and it's become extremely
18:37
important that you're doing that I know
18:38
I've learned a lot from your critiques
18:39
it's kind of attracted my attention to
18:41
this topic and I really appreciate
18:43
you're doing that I appreciate yours
18:45
taking the time to come on and talk to
18:47
us as well
18:48
[Music]
18:55
7 PM Eastern exclusively on Rumble you
18:58
can catch the full nightly shows live or
19:00
view the backlog of episodes for free on
19:03
our Rumble page you can also find full
19:05
episodes the morning after they air
19:07
across all major podcasting platforms
19:09
including Spotify and apple all the
19:11
information you need is linked below we
19:13
hope to see you there
[*/quote*]
Author
Topic: Der Große Krieg um die Müllhalde Wikipedia (Read 95 times)