Wikipedia’s Neutral Point of View

It’s been dead for a while.

Conservatives have long been blowing the whistle on Wikipedia’s leftist bias. The site’s co-founder Larry Sanger apparently agrees with them.

In a blog post last week, Sanger argued that Wikipedia has abandoned all neutrality in the name of avoiding what activist journalists call the “false balance” – the idea that not all opposing views of an argument should be given equal time. He goes through several pages to support his thesis, noting the rather charged language often employed.

Wikipedia Co-Founder: Site’s Neutrality No Longer Exists, Favors Leftism by  Paul Bois

Note that the claim to promote a “neutral point of view” will never be abandoned.

Or to take an up-to-the-minute issue, the LGBT adoption article includes several talking points in favor of LGBT adoption rights, but omits any arguments against.

Wikipedia Co-Founder: Site’s Neutrality No Longer Exists, Favors Leftism by  Paul Bois

Standard Operating Procedure.

It is time for Wikipedia to come clean and admit that it has abandoned NPOV (i.e., neutrality as a policy). At the very least they should admit that that they have redefined the term in a way that makes it utterly incompatible with its original notion of neutrality, which is the ordinary and common one.4 It might be better to embrace a “credibility” policy and admit that their notion of what is credible does, in fact, bias them against conservatism, traditional religiosity, and minority perspectives on science and medicine—to say nothing of many other topics on which Wikipedia has biases.

Of course, Wikipedians are unlikely to make any such change; they live in a fantasy world of their own making.5

The world would be better served by an independent and decentralized encyclopedia network, such as I proposed with the Encyclosphere. We will certainly develop such a network, but if it is to remain fully independent of all governmental and big corporate interests, funds are naturally scarce and it will take time.

Wikipedia Co-Founder: Site’s Neutrality No Longer Exists, Favors Leftism by  Paul Bois

The problem is, there is, and never will be, a neutral point of view.

The canard of “a neutral point of view” is what the Right Sort used to dump out all that nasty Christian stuff in the first place — from equality under the law, to listening to at least a witness from either side before making a call.

“There is no neutrality.”

What the world is waiting for is a steadily growing encyclopedia, seeing all things from an objectively true Christian perspective. The good and the bad, accurately, the way God sees all things.

Until then? Wikipedia is easily accessible, and will be used, until it is unusable.

When a competitor becomes available – stemming from some online info-gathering revolution and a bit of AI, I would say – Wikipedia will cast it into the garbage bin, and that will be that.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.