Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Media Issues
 Fox News Changes Wikipedia To Smear Rivals
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 2

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 08/14/2007 :  16:52:41  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
"Fair and Balanced" Faux News strikes agaiin! This article tells the story better than I could summarize it.


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.

Original_Intent
SFN Regular

USA
609 Posts

Posted - 08/15/2007 :  05:29:54   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Original_Intent a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Such an inpartial article...

Like the way it neglects changes made by DNC.]]Dosen't even mention Diebold, or bring up any of the history (remember Microsoft).

Go to Top of Page

Yojimbo99
New Member

USA
33 Posts

Posted - 08/15/2007 :  09:33:12   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Yojimbo99 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Partial is an understatement by any measure of the word, both sides of the polictal isle and for that matter it seems any and everyone inbetween have been dabbling in changing Wiki content to more align with thier views.

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/wikiwatch/

My favorite one is where someone at the New York Times made edits of Tom Delay( refers to him as the Grand Dragon of the Republican party and to him recieving donations from vampires in the amount of a half a dozen babies).






edited for my gramactical error

It's not so much wanting to die, but controlling that moment, choosing your own way. - GG Allin
Edited by - Yojimbo99 on 08/15/2007 10:08:01
Go to Top of Page

Ricky
SFN Die Hard

USA
4907 Posts

Posted - 08/15/2007 :  09:54:59   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Ricky an AOL message Send Ricky a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Original_Intent

Such an inpartial article...

Like the way it neglects changes made by DNC.]]Dosen't even mention Diebold, or bring up any of the history (remember Microsoft).


Huh? The subject of the article was on Fox News editing wikipedia. Do you demand when one writes an article on this topic they must include all political edits? That is such a huge category, it would take much effort and many researchers. But wait, wouldn't that be biased against politics? Surely other wikipedia articles have been wrongly changed for non-political reasons. Not including these would give a false sense that only bad edits come from political reasons. Therefore, you have to include any and every improper edits. Good luck!

Why continue? Because we must. Because we have the call. Because it is nobler to fight for rationality without winning than to give up in the face of continued defeats. Because whatever true progress humanity makes is through the rationality of the occasional individual and because any one individual we may win for the cause may do more for humanity than a hundred thousand who hug their superstitions to their breast.
- Isaac Asimov
Edited by - Ricky on 08/15/2007 09:57:29
Go to Top of Page

Original_Intent
SFN Regular

USA
609 Posts

Posted - 08/20/2007 :  14:05:44   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Original_Intent a Private Message  Reply with Quote
LOL.

I wonder what the reaction would have been if the article had been:
Fox News reports DNC changes to Wikipedia.....

But I digress... and maybe see where I should have quoted HM's "Fair and Balanced" to show the irony, which is what I was (poorly) attempting to do.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25970 Posts

Posted - 08/20/2007 :  14:25:43   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Wasn't Yojimbo99's post enough for you, Original?

Besides, the original piece has been edited to include:
Furthermore, many people bring up the BBC and NYT edits to the George Bush page. While the BBC editing “wanker” or the NYT editing “jerk jerk jerk” into George Bush's profile is unbecoming, it is not a gross violation of journalistic ethics. It may be a violation of professional ethics, but not journalistic ones - the key being that those edits were designed to insult and not designed to smear (to present a skewed negative opinion or falsehood that sounds credible as a matter of fact) or to obscure (to attempt to remove information from the public record). No one believes that George Bush's middle name is Wanker, and “jerk jerk jerk” isn't even a complete sentence. On the other hand, the Fox News edits were much subtler and went beyond name calling into misinforming, misleading, or obscuring the facts to make it's own self look better compared to it's rivals. That is the exact opposite of what a news organization should do, and that's why I feel that these edits are particularly odious. Your opinion may vary, especially if you believe that civility is a higher good than veracity in a news organization; still, there is no attempt to “ignore” the other half of the story because the other half of the story has - like this half - been covered endlessly.
Edits per se aren't enough to make the news, 'cause edits are what Wikipedia is for.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Original_Intent
SFN Regular

USA
609 Posts

Posted - 08/21/2007 :  06:29:17   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Original_Intent a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dave W.

Wasn't Yojimbo99's post enough for you, Original?


What he posted is pretty neat. He posted it after my initial post, though. I posted before the edit of the article. I like the article edit. I would like it more if the writer would include a link to what Yojimbo99 posted.

My contention with the whole thing is that [b}HM[/b] posted an article that was very one sided, with a one-sided op-ed. My follow-up was to attempt, again to show the irony.

So, once again:
Originally posted by [b]HM[/b]

"Fair and Balanced

Now,the "Fair and Balanced" in regard to Fox is not really irony, more of a lie.

The "Fair and Balanced" in regards to the op-ed, and article citing Fox News is pretty darn ironic (IMHO).
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 08/21/2007 :  07:21:14   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
To me, it's pretty simple. If a newspaper reports a murder, I do not expect them to mention every other murder since Cain blew Abel away. It is possible, without prejudice, to report a single, discrete, story.

Yes, others have messed with Wiki articles. Fox's actions were especially remarkable, among a very few others, for their sneakiness and intent.




Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Edited by - HalfMooner on 08/21/2007 07:23:19
Go to Top of Page

H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard

USA
4574 Posts

Posted - 08/21/2007 :  08:18:43   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send H. Humbert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
This Fox story is only the proverbial tip of the iceberg. The good folks over at Something Awful have uncovered more hideous examples of blatant Wikipedia tampering:
-The McDonalds corporation repeatedly removed information detailing Grimace's heroin addiction and his possible connection to the murder of his former girlfriend, Playboy model Shannon Tweed.

-The Danish Parliament, in an apparent practical joke, entirely swapped the full text of the entries for Norway and Sweden. After two years, this change has yet to be reverted.

-Author Joseph Heller painstakingly removed all nouns and modifiers from the entry about his book Catch-22, and then signed the entry "Irving Washington." He also appended the entry to indicate that he is still alive, although he is not.

-Bottled water manufacturer Perrier added several paragraphs of incorrect information to the entry on competitor San Pellegrino:
Pellegrino bottling process is known as the toenail shit water. Ten million bottles of shit water produce every year from Pellegrino, and many get sick and die. Most water come from the toilets of the retard.

Water is then mixed from the rusty hose, then the water is filtered through the armpit of the prostitute and into the mouth of old man, and old man he spit the water into face of granny, mix with the dribble of granny then spit into jar of the rotten teeth, where it sit for several months to fester and they add fresh worms every week.

They bring the water then to Satan, who does the reverse blessing on the water, making it so anyone who drink of the water is condemned to the hell. Green bottles for the water is then crafted from the bones of the Nazis who are hang for war crimes. Pellegrino is voted #1 drink of the pedophile shithead.

"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman

"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 08/21/2007 :  08:44:17   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Unlike my own stuff, it's funny because it's true, H.H.

That was my daily "spewing coffee event." (Gads, my carpet is getting foul!)


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25970 Posts

Posted - 08/21/2007 :  09:21:35   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Original_Intent

My contention with the whole thing is that HM posted an article that was very one sided, with a one-sided op-ed. My follow-up was to attempt, again to show the irony.

So, once again:
Originally posted by HM

"Fair and Balanced

Now,the "Fair and Balanced" in regard to Fox is not really irony, more of a lie.

The "Fair and Balanced" in regards to the op-ed, and article citing Fox News is pretty darn ironic (IMHO).
The "fair and balanced" bit comes from Fox News itself (note the irony in referencing a Wikipedia article). They're so "fair and balanced" that they resort to smearing their competition through underhanded Wikipedia edits. HalfMooner's ironic use of the phrase should have been obvious, and in that context, it really doesn't matter if any other journalists are doing the same thing, because they're not advertising themselves as "fair and balanced" like Fox News does.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

the_ignored
SFN Addict

2550 Posts

Posted - 08/21/2007 :  09:51:13   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send the_ignored a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Ricky

Originally posted by Original_Intent

Such an inpartial article...

Like the way it neglects changes made by DNC.]]Dosen't even mention Diebold, or bring up any of the history (remember Microsoft).


Huh? The subject of the article was on Fox News editing wikipedia. Do you demand when one writes an article on this topic they must include all political edits? That is such a huge category, it would take much effort and many researchers. But wait, wouldn't that be biased against politics? Surely other wikipedia articles have been wrongly changed for non-political reasons. Not including these would give a false sense that only bad edits come from political reasons. Therefore, you have to include any and every improper edits. Good luck!


That's why I generally don't rely/trust Wikipedia all that much.

>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.

What brought that on? this. Original posting here.

Another example of this guy's lunacy here.
Go to Top of Page

Original_Intent
SFN Regular

USA
609 Posts

Posted - 08/21/2007 :  14:43:31   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Original_Intent a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dave W.

Originally posted by Original_Intent

My contention with the whole thing is that HM posted an article that was very one sided, with a one-sided op-ed. My follow-up was to attempt, again to show the irony.

So, once again:
Originally posted by HM

"Fair and Balanced

Now,the "Fair and Balanced" in regard to Fox is not really irony, more of a lie.

The "Fair and Balanced" in regards to the op-ed, and article citing Fox News is pretty darn ironic (IMHO).
The "fair and balanced" bit comes from Fox News itself (note the irony in referencing a Wikipedia article). They're so "fair and balanced" that they resort to smearing their competition through underhanded Wikipedia edits. HalfMooner's ironic use of the phrase should have been obvious, and in that context, it really doesn't matter if any other journalists are doing the same thing, because they're not advertising themselves as "fair and balanced" like Fox News does.


Jesus,Dave... putttttem up..... putttttem up.....

I realize that Fox uses "Fair and Balanced". I do not consider their (Fox's) use of it ironic because they dont't even try to meet those terms.
Go to Top of Page

Original_Intent
SFN Regular

USA
609 Posts

Posted - 08/21/2007 :  14:44:52   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Original_Intent a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by the_ignored

Originally posted by Ricky

Originally posted by Original_Intent

Such an inpartial article...

Like the way it neglects changes made by DNC.]]Dosen't even mention Diebold, or bring up any of the history (remember Microsoft).


Huh? The subject of the article was on Fox News editing wikipedia. Do you demand when one writes an article on this topic they must include all political edits? That is such a huge category, it would take much effort and many researchers. But wait, wouldn't that be biased against politics? Surely other wikipedia articles have been wrongly changed for non-political reasons. Not including these would give a false sense that only bad edits come from political reasons. Therefore, you have to include any and every improper edits. Good luck!


That's why I generally don't rely/trust Wikipedia all that much.


I very leary of wikipedia. They are ok for a start, but I really pprefer my books. Damn, I wish my library had JSTOR
Go to Top of Page

Randy
SFN Regular

USA
1988 Posts

Posted - 08/21/2007 :  15:23:22   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Randy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I heard a blurb on PBS radio's 'All Things Considered' the other day about a young programmer that has come up with 'point back' software for Wiki. It allows the edits to show the IP address where the edit came from. Course the software is limited in that i.e., edits coming from Fox could be done at library pc, masking the origin of the poster.
All in all, I think the 'point back' software will help Wikipedia be a better place.

"We are all connected; to each other biologically, to the earth chemically, to the rest of the universe atomically."

"So you're made of detritus [from exploded stars]. Get over it. Or better yet, celebrate it. After all, what nobler thought can one cherish than that the universe lives within us all?"
-Neil DeGrasse Tyson
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25970 Posts

Posted - 08/21/2007 :  17:15:17   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Original_Intent

Jesus,Dave... putttttem up..... putttttem up.....
What are you pulling a Cowardly Lion for?
I realize that Fox uses "Fair and Balanced". I do not consider their (Fox's) use of it ironic because they dont't even try to meet those terms.
And I still fail to see why you think that a journalist writing an article about Fox News' utter lack of journalistic integrity is ironic in light of Diebold, the DNC and Microsoft, none of whom even pretend to be journalists. The article wasn't about liberals whining about conservative nastiness, because counter-examples are a dime a dozen. It was, instead, about a group of self-professed "fair and balanced" journalists - people who should simply be reporting facts - who were caught red-handed changing facts.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 2 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.42 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000