Yesterday was interesting. I didn't wake up thinking any of this would happen but when I saw Wikipedia's response and calling me non-neutral it triggered the 'are you f**king kidding me' response and I set about to challenge the stupidity. When I looked after my response (you had emailed them by then) I saw the 'conspiracy theorist' tag removed and it just said 'author'. I thought NO, that can't be right, you are much more than an author. Somehow I felt that I had stripped you of your badge of honor. I was hoping for 'has been called' to retain the honor and lessen the claim. As you pointed out in today's article, 'conspiracy theorist' can be both a badge of honor or a pejorative. Clearly when in context with disinformation enthusiast its intended meaning was to destroy reputation and not any other innocent agenda as Wikipedia eluded to.
I really liked your email to them and the comparison of other quotes they chose not to use.
As for suing Wikipedia for libel, as you say it would be a tough road and hard to prove. That doesn't mean that there aren't other legal avenues and class actions that could be done. It seems that the biggest issue isn't damage to you, but damage to all the people that are reading information that simply isn't true. The world of today and the world of even just one year ago are drastically different. As my One planet, two worlds article explains, there have been two very different 'thought groups' kept separate by entities like Wikipedia.
MAHA and all the amazing appointments of such a great team for starters. The Covid narrative is beginning to crumble and it is even possible that Fauci may in the long run go to jail. It is being realized how the media and Wikipedia has been lying to the world. THAT is the class action suit that could take it down or make it right and the effect on other lying entities would be huge. Every article that is easily debunked with science can leverage the Missouri vs Biden win. We have Jay Bhattacharia as NIH, RFK Jr as FDA, Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence. We have all the key people in government to claim that Wikipedia is wrong and prove it in court. All of the plaintiffs would be yourself and all the other substack authors that were silenced and told they were wrong. That is just the beginning of the 'class' that would join the lawsuit. Your 'conspiracy theorist' title could just be the 'Tunisian fruit vendor' of current day but without all the flames and dying part. Thinking libel was not thinking big enough.
A friend was able to change it to POPME! I'm sure it'll last 30 seconds (although he is an official editor so maybe 30 minutes?) so I grabbed a screenshot. I may frame it. ;)
There has to be some avenue to at least cripple this behemoth of lies clothed in its garb of allusion to the word 'encyclopedia' as though its a disinterested information source. Even a large class action would draw a huge amount of attention to the issue. Ultimately, I do think we have to keep mocking these entities and prodding people to snap out of their trances and slowly but surely erode the legitimacy of Wiki and the entire landscape of media prevaricators in general.
Yes. Humor is the silver bullet against these entities. They can't take it and it punches through the programming of most of the audience. It just so happens that humor is Jenna's super power (as well as many of her followers).
Dear Jenna, I live in the Socialist Republic of Germany, formerly known as BRD where our not even constituated new government, also known as the Uniparty wants to outlaw lies and disinformation (no, they actually don't think this could ever become a boomerang, but thanks for asking). So actually, a libel suit should work just fine over here, don't you think? Yeah, me neither. As to Mr. Whatchamacallit Ayani or something? If he had a Wikipedia Page to start with, I would have left him a nice edit, but apparently he really is as unimportant from the start, the pompious little twat. Also, nobodies real name is Carlos Ayani, I am willing to bet a steakdinner on that. Keep up the good work, I for one very much enjoy your substack and I also identify as a conspiracy theorist with the pronouns told/you/so.
Thank you but it's not my feathers I am decorating myself with (probably doesn't make sense, I just translated a german phrase 1:1) It's a meme and my background on X. But I absolutely love it, too. Whoever came up with it deserves a big rund of applaus! I'll check out your post directly. 😊
😂 cheers ,I am glad it works. I know and follow eugypiuus. He really tries explain the lunacy that is the state of Germany at present to a Broadcast public and I am thankful for that
We all feel doom looming, the feeling of losing our country to another dictatorship and this time it might be final… but if you lose your humor, you lose all hope.
Here is how Perplexity AI describes Wikifabricator...
Wikipedia's treatment of individual conservative profiles has been criticized for lacking objectivity and fairness. Conservative figures often find their Wikipedia entries disproportionately highlighting negative aspects or controversial statements, creating an unfavorable portrayal. This bias is not limited to isolated cases but appears to be a systemic issue affecting many right-leaning public figures.
The Manhattan Institute's recent study, using linguistic analysis of thousands of Wikipedia articles, revealed a tendency to associate right-leaning public figures with more negative sentiments compared to their left-leaning counterparts. This bias extends beyond mere wording preferences, affecting the overall tone and content of the articles.
For conservatives with a Wikipedia page, this means that their online representation often serves as a "hit piece," compiled by potentially hundreds of contributors determined to promote the most negative version of them. This can significantly impact public perception, as many people rely on Wikipedia for quick information about individuals.
The situation has become so problematic that even reputable sources are now questioned, leading to intentional dissemination of misinformation on various topics. This bias not only affects the subjects of the articles but also influences readers' perceptions and understanding of conservative figures and ideas.
The issue of bias in Wikipedia extends beyond individual profiles, with studies suggesting a general left-leaning slant in political content. This broader trend contributes to the challenges faced by conservative figures in maintaining fair and balanced representations on the platform.
As a homeopathic veterinarian, I really don't know where homeopathy fits in the political spectrum. Clearly not a "pseudoscience," as Wokepedia would judge it.
All the left/right stuff leaves me pretty cold, to tell the truth. But there's the real issue, isn't it? The truth. That's what we'd consult an encyclopedia to seek.
I grew up with a set of somewhat outdated World Book Encyclopedias, and they got a workout when I was in Jr High and HS! No slants that I knew of, but then, I was pretty wet behind the ears
Sue the bastards! And what ever you do, never evah donate to them!!
Odd that Wikipedia has not yet climbed on board the anti-bias train along with so many other organizations that “claim” to be doing since Trump’s election, like NPR.
I only use wokapedia to find a celeb’s date of birth which I assume is correct. I’ve never relied on them for anything truthful. I’d love to see you sue them. It’s a horrible site and it’s the MSNBC of information.
I view Wokepedia in the same manner as I view handling a snake... the only real danger is not knowing what you're dealing with. Once the necessary precautions have been taken, they're relegated to the status of "ineffectual influencers"
Question: What's the difference between a "Conspiracy Theorist/ Disinformation Enthusiast" and a "Soothsayer"
The funny part, admittedly darkly humorous, is that these type folks don’t ever see or admit just how biased they are. As if there were only ONE right way of thinking
Ah, in that, Wikipedia is very like NPR. After Katherine Maher’s congressional testimony the other day, Matt Taibbi did a random check on that day’s NPR stories. He found one that reported the reason we all love hating on Meghan Markle boils down to 3 reasons: racism, racism, and racism. Not because she’s dumb, which she is, not because she’s dumb, which she is, and not because she’s dumb , which she also is. So, yes, Maher is CEO of a neutral political viewpoint.
My experience with the Meghan Markle thing is that the Millennials, who are very educated on spotting narcissism (the lying, gaslighting, bullying, need for control and attention, etc.) see her as Queen Bee of that particular kingdom. (Not saying she isn't dumb as well.)
"My Name is Jenna, and I Am the High Priestess of Radical Common Sense, Prophetic Opinions, and Occasionally Outrageous Shenanigans" - How about the "Shaman of Snark"? (tongue in cheek).
I stopped using Wikipedia because you and others made me aware of its bias. So I'd say tell them good-bye and don't let the door hit your butt on the way out. Keep on telling your truth, Jenna, and as an attorney I used to work for liked to say: illegitimi non carborundum
I only use wiki to find the capital of somewhere, population and where a famous person is buried, or when camping out west, to find the elevation of campsites so I don’t keel over from altitude sickness. That’s about it.
I met the "Chicken Soup for the Soul" guys once. Talk about creepy! Wikipedi is a well worn joke. They give huge space to really creepy people. No one of note really cares, but it is a good reference for birth dates and so on. BTW, a signed copy of a first edition of the PDR might now be priceless Princess.
I say don’t sue them, just keep on trolling them hilariously as you have been doing. And please share your trolling with us, I thoroughly enjoyed the belly laughs. Eckhart Tolle says that an excellent way to go higher is to allow yourself to be misunderstood. Just sayin. Wishing you all the best!
"Cautiously credible", but only on topics that don't directly endanger their left-leaning political biases. Technical and apolitical scientific matters, for example.
Not country, county. Unless “they “ are screwing around with geographical data, the location of a county shouldn’t be endangering any left wing biases. But what do I know?
I’ve never known who decided to create a wikipedia page about me, or why some anonymous person decided to do that. For the longest time, it was a word salad mess but I didn’t have the time to figure out whether it could be revised or what I would replace it with. Sometime during the past year or two (or three?), it has improved to reasonably readable and partially accurate. Again, I don’t know who changed it or why. Ever since the first word salad, I’ve known that wikipedia content is highly untrustworthy. I say we should preserve all of their inaccuracy for the history books, as proof of what these times were really like.
Awesome article. Thanks for the morning laughs.
Yesterday was interesting. I didn't wake up thinking any of this would happen but when I saw Wikipedia's response and calling me non-neutral it triggered the 'are you f**king kidding me' response and I set about to challenge the stupidity. When I looked after my response (you had emailed them by then) I saw the 'conspiracy theorist' tag removed and it just said 'author'. I thought NO, that can't be right, you are much more than an author. Somehow I felt that I had stripped you of your badge of honor. I was hoping for 'has been called' to retain the honor and lessen the claim. As you pointed out in today's article, 'conspiracy theorist' can be both a badge of honor or a pejorative. Clearly when in context with disinformation enthusiast its intended meaning was to destroy reputation and not any other innocent agenda as Wikipedia eluded to.
I really liked your email to them and the comparison of other quotes they chose not to use.
As for suing Wikipedia for libel, as you say it would be a tough road and hard to prove. That doesn't mean that there aren't other legal avenues and class actions that could be done. It seems that the biggest issue isn't damage to you, but damage to all the people that are reading information that simply isn't true. The world of today and the world of even just one year ago are drastically different. As my One planet, two worlds article explains, there have been two very different 'thought groups' kept separate by entities like Wikipedia.
https://mikemyhre.substack.com/p/one-planet-two-worlds
MAHA and all the amazing appointments of such a great team for starters. The Covid narrative is beginning to crumble and it is even possible that Fauci may in the long run go to jail. It is being realized how the media and Wikipedia has been lying to the world. THAT is the class action suit that could take it down or make it right and the effect on other lying entities would be huge. Every article that is easily debunked with science can leverage the Missouri vs Biden win. We have Jay Bhattacharia as NIH, RFK Jr as FDA, Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence. We have all the key people in government to claim that Wikipedia is wrong and prove it in court. All of the plaintiffs would be yourself and all the other substack authors that were silenced and told they were wrong. That is just the beginning of the 'class' that would join the lawsuit. Your 'conspiracy theorist' title could just be the 'Tunisian fruit vendor' of current day but without all the flames and dying part. Thinking libel was not thinking big enough.
Excellent points! Damn, we need Jeff Childers on this.
And Jeff would probably say something about the moving wheels of justice. 🤣
Moving SLOOOOOOW
Yes.
But they do move. He says.
At least the wheels on the bus move. Unlike the hips of the drag queen that go swish swish swish. Just gross.
LOL
@jeffchilders should read this article and comments. ;-)
Maybe he can file the lawsuit!
Maybe he’ll file your lawsuit!
A friend was able to change it to POPME! I'm sure it'll last 30 seconds (although he is an official editor so maybe 30 minutes?) so I grabbed a screenshot. I may frame it. ;)
https://shorturl.at/esRjc
Now you are linked to my article. That confirms it, you are POPME!
It is still up an hour later. I did a screen grab on that one!
There has to be some avenue to at least cripple this behemoth of lies clothed in its garb of allusion to the word 'encyclopedia' as though its a disinterested information source. Even a large class action would draw a huge amount of attention to the issue. Ultimately, I do think we have to keep mocking these entities and prodding people to snap out of their trances and slowly but surely erode the legitimacy of Wiki and the entire landscape of media prevaricators in general.
Yes. Humor is the silver bullet against these entities. They can't take it and it punches through the programming of most of the audience. It just so happens that humor is Jenna's super power (as well as many of her followers).
LFG! File the damn lawsuit and take Wokepedia down. No more fiddling around with nimrods and dimwits. We are done with fake BS.
Let's make it Brokeapedia.
Sounds good to me!
Maybe we need to get into some severe lawfare, as that is the favourite left wing nutjobs activity!! Right back at ya’ morons!!!
Dear Jenna, I live in the Socialist Republic of Germany, formerly known as BRD where our not even constituated new government, also known as the Uniparty wants to outlaw lies and disinformation (no, they actually don't think this could ever become a boomerang, but thanks for asking). So actually, a libel suit should work just fine over here, don't you think? Yeah, me neither. As to Mr. Whatchamacallit Ayani or something? If he had a Wikipedia Page to start with, I would have left him a nice edit, but apparently he really is as unimportant from the start, the pompious little twat. Also, nobodies real name is Carlos Ayani, I am willing to bet a steakdinner on that. Keep up the good work, I for one very much enjoy your substack and I also identify as a conspiracy theorist with the pronouns told/you/so.
😉 Hilarious! told/you/so !!
You are being generous, kind Mara, by stating he is a pompous 'little twat'...he's a coward. See my last post.
Thank you but it's not my feathers I am decorating myself with (probably doesn't make sense, I just translated a german phrase 1:1) It's a meme and my background on X. But I absolutely love it, too. Whoever came up with it deserves a big rund of applaus! I'll check out your post directly. 😊
Good for you to read Jenna's writings! It's difficult translating humor in different languages because of all the idioms.
Your 'feathers' translation not perfect but it makes complete sense.
you might like eugyppius substack s/he writes about the joy of living in Germany!
😂 cheers ,I am glad it works. I know and follow eugypiuus. He really tries explain the lunacy that is the state of Germany at present to a Broadcast public and I am thankful for that
I savor his writings and there is a mix of laughter and deep sorrow reading what is happening in Germany, of course, from his/her perspective.
We all feel doom looming, the feeling of losing our country to another dictatorship and this time it might be final… but if you lose your humor, you lose all hope.
C'mon. any old so-and-so can be "author and speaker" but "conspiracy theorist and disinformation enthusiast". Now, that's special!
Here is how Perplexity AI describes Wikifabricator...
Wikipedia's treatment of individual conservative profiles has been criticized for lacking objectivity and fairness. Conservative figures often find their Wikipedia entries disproportionately highlighting negative aspects or controversial statements, creating an unfavorable portrayal. This bias is not limited to isolated cases but appears to be a systemic issue affecting many right-leaning public figures.
The Manhattan Institute's recent study, using linguistic analysis of thousands of Wikipedia articles, revealed a tendency to associate right-leaning public figures with more negative sentiments compared to their left-leaning counterparts. This bias extends beyond mere wording preferences, affecting the overall tone and content of the articles.
For conservatives with a Wikipedia page, this means that their online representation often serves as a "hit piece," compiled by potentially hundreds of contributors determined to promote the most negative version of them. This can significantly impact public perception, as many people rely on Wikipedia for quick information about individuals.
The situation has become so problematic that even reputable sources are now questioned, leading to intentional dissemination of misinformation on various topics. This bias not only affects the subjects of the articles but also influences readers' perceptions and understanding of conservative figures and ideas.
The issue of bias in Wikipedia extends beyond individual profiles, with studies suggesting a general left-leaning slant in political content. This broader trend contributes to the challenges faced by conservative figures in maintaining fair and balanced representations on the platform.
In my own words, Wikipedia sucks.
Sounds like an excellent opening argument for a lawsuit... ;)
As a homeopathic veterinarian, I really don't know where homeopathy fits in the political spectrum. Clearly not a "pseudoscience," as Wokepedia would judge it.
All the left/right stuff leaves me pretty cold, to tell the truth. But there's the real issue, isn't it? The truth. That's what we'd consult an encyclopedia to seek.
I grew up with a set of somewhat outdated World Book Encyclopedias, and they got a workout when I was in Jr High and HS! No slants that I knew of, but then, I was pretty wet behind the ears
Sue the bastards! And what ever you do, never evah donate to them!!
Odd that Wikipedia has not yet climbed on board the anti-bias train along with so many other organizations that “claim” to be doing since Trump’s election, like NPR.
I only use wokapedia to find a celeb’s date of birth which I assume is correct. I’ve never relied on them for anything truthful. I’d love to see you sue them. It’s a horrible site and it’s the MSNBC of information.
I view Wokepedia in the same manner as I view handling a snake... the only real danger is not knowing what you're dealing with. Once the necessary precautions have been taken, they're relegated to the status of "ineffectual influencers"
Question: What's the difference between a "Conspiracy Theorist/ Disinformation Enthusiast" and a "Soothsayer"
Answer: About 6 months.
Just a bit longer than the difference between a good haircut and a bad one… LOL!
The funny part, admittedly darkly humorous, is that these type folks don’t ever see or admit just how biased they are. As if there were only ONE right way of thinking
Ah, in that, Wikipedia is very like NPR. After Katherine Maher’s congressional testimony the other day, Matt Taibbi did a random check on that day’s NPR stories. He found one that reported the reason we all love hating on Meghan Markle boils down to 3 reasons: racism, racism, and racism. Not because she’s dumb, which she is, not because she’s dumb, which she is, and not because she’s dumb , which she also is. So, yes, Maher is CEO of a neutral political viewpoint.
My experience with the Meghan Markle thing is that the Millennials, who are very educated on spotting narcissism (the lying, gaslighting, bullying, need for control and attention, etc.) see her as Queen Bee of that particular kingdom. (Not saying she isn't dumb as well.)
"My Name is Jenna, and I Am the High Priestess of Radical Common Sense, Prophetic Opinions, and Occasionally Outrageous Shenanigans" - How about the "Shaman of Snark"? (tongue in cheek).
I stopped using Wikipedia because you and others made me aware of its bias. So I'd say tell them good-bye and don't let the door hit your butt on the way out. Keep on telling your truth, Jenna, and as an attorney I used to work for liked to say: illegitimi non carborundum
I only use wiki to find the capital of somewhere, population and where a famous person is buried, or when camping out west, to find the elevation of campsites so I don’t keel over from altitude sickness. That’s about it.
I met the "Chicken Soup for the Soul" guys once. Talk about creepy! Wikipedi is a well worn joke. They give huge space to really creepy people. No one of note really cares, but it is a good reference for birth dates and so on. BTW, a signed copy of a first edition of the PDR might now be priceless Princess.
I say don’t sue them, just keep on trolling them hilariously as you have been doing. And please share your trolling with us, I thoroughly enjoyed the belly laughs. Eckhart Tolle says that an excellent way to go higher is to allow yourself to be misunderstood. Just sayin. Wishing you all the best!
Just so you know, I've NEVER looked anyone up on this terrible site. I learned years ago most of it is BULLSHIT
"Cautiously credible", but only on topics that don't directly endanger their left-leaning political biases. Technical and apolitical scientific matters, for example.
Or where your county is located. 🤣
Country?
Not country, county. Unless “they “ are screwing around with geographical data, the location of a county shouldn’t be endangering any left wing biases. But what do I know?
Got it. Thought you were suggesting Wikipedia versions might be differing in overall credibility from country to country. May very well be so, though.
Yes; file it!
I’ve never known who decided to create a wikipedia page about me, or why some anonymous person decided to do that. For the longest time, it was a word salad mess but I didn’t have the time to figure out whether it could be revised or what I would replace it with. Sometime during the past year or two (or three?), it has improved to reasonably readable and partially accurate. Again, I don’t know who changed it or why. Ever since the first word salad, I’ve known that wikipedia content is highly untrustworthy. I say we should preserve all of their inaccuracy for the history books, as proof of what these times were really like.
And by the way, I don’t recommend using Alexa… or any other spyware.
Share a link??? ;)
What, and reveal my wikipedia-defined identity? 🙂.