Wikiproganda on Global Warming

Wikipropaganda
Wikipropaganda is a new composite word (from Wiki(pedia) and propaganda) meaning "propaganda executed via control exercised over articles on a particular subject area." is an online free encyclopedia supposedly open to the public for editing and therefore theoretically assumed to be unbiased. Wikipropaganda is a word that therefore denies the very basis of 's worldwide acceptance as a useful source of reliable information.
==Rise to Prominence of the Term "Wikipropaganda"==
The word "wikipropaganda" was first brought to prominence (and possibly also created) by Lawrence Solomon on July 8, 2008 in his article of the same name, published in National Review Online. This article condemned the control over Global Warming and Climate Change articles on by a few individuals causing strong bias toward the Global Warming alarmists viewpoint. This article was reprinted on the CBS News website. Following this exposure wikipropaganda has now entered widespread usage with a Google search returning over 4,900 hits on July 31, 2008. By December 6, 2009 the number of Google search hits had mushroomed to 21,400.
Wikipropaganda Article
In July 2008, the CBS News website carried a story titled "Wikipropaganda On Global Warming" in which Lawrence Solomon exposed the control exercised by William Connolley & others over articles related to Global Warming.
Solomon wrote: "Naturally I was surprised to read on that Oreskes’s work had been vindicated and that, for instance, one of her most thorough critics, British scientist and publisher Bennie Peiser, not only had been discredited but had grudgingly conceded Oreskes was right. I checked with Peiser, who said he had done no such thing. I then corrected the entry, and advised Peiser that I had done so. Peiser wrote back saying he couldn’t see my corrections on the page. I made the changes again, and this time confirmed that the changes had been saved. But then, in a twinkle, they were gone again. I made other changes. And others. They all disappeared shortly after they were made.
Turns out that on some folks are more equal than others. Kim Dabelstein Petersen is a “editor” who seems to devote a large part of his life to editing reams and reams of pages to pump the assertions of global-warming alarmists and deprecate or make disappear the arguments of skeptics.
I soon found others who had the same experience: They would try to squeeze in any dissent, or even correct an obvious slander against a dissenter, and Petersen or some other censor would immediately snuff them out."
Solomon said of one administrator: "by virtue of his power at , Connolley, a ruthless enforcer of the doomsday consensus, may be the world’s most influential person in the global warming debate after Al Gore." Solomon further alleged: "Connolley routinely uses his editorial clout to tear down scientists of great accomplishment such as Fred Singer, the first director of the U.S. National Weather Satellite Service and a scientist with dazzling achievements."
Solomon charged Connolley with flouting rules: " is full of rules that editors are supposed to follow, and it has a code of civility. Those rules and codes don’t apply to Connolley, or to those he favors."
"Peisers crap shouldn’t be in here,” Connolley wrote several weeks ago, in berating a n colleague during an “edit war,” as they’re called. Trumping ’s stated rules, Connelly used his authority to ensure readers saw only what he wanted them to see."
Finally Solomon condemned 's credibility on Global Warming stating categorically: "Any reference, anywhere among ’s 2.5 million English-language pages, that casts doubt on the consequences of climate change will be bent to Connolley’s bidding."

Main Menu

See Also

Main Menu