According to this San Francisco Gate article, apparently one should use caution.  It seems that Senator Feinstein’s staff altered some information about her and her husband , but of course she knew nothing about it.

What was it that they did not want on the site?

• These include removing references to a 1992 fine for failing to disclose that Blum had guaranteed Feinstein’s campaign loans.
• Also removed, according to the Wikinews account, was “a paragraph regarding a conflict of interest debate from 1997 when Mr. Blum had invested millions of dollars in Chinese businesses when Ms. Feinstein was campaigning in the Senate to lift trade sanctions against the country. Mr. Blum later announced he would donate all profits from his Chinese investments to charity.”

Who else has done this?

• The investigation showed that the office of Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., removed a paragraph about a 1996 plagiarism scandal.
• Sen. Conrad Burns’ use of the word “ragheads,” was removed from the Montana Republican’s biography, according to the investigation, along with mention of legislation he sponsored that would reduce the sovereignty of Native American tribes.
• Staff of Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, removed a paragraph that said Harkin had falsely claimed to have flown combat missions over Vietnam, the investigation found, along with references to his pro-Israeli positions.

6 Responses to “Wikipedia, Can You Trust The Info?”

1. Robert
   February 9, 2006 - 11:06 PM on February 9th, 2006

   Isn’t it quite remarkable that these highly educated people, professionals, wealthy, leaders in politics, can skillfully manipulate and maneuver politically to the nth degree.

   But somehow, in certain instances, they are suddenly incapable. They don’t know anything about it, can’t recall anything, never looked into it, didn’t realize it, yada yada yada.

   DiFi is the just the latest example of politico lying and hypocrisy. The Klintons were masters at denial, obstruction, and obfuscation.

   Like the subpoenaed Rose Law firm billing records. Lost, until well after the reason for their being subpoenaed went away. Then, shazam! Why, we never thought to look behind that door! There’s the box! Who’d have thunk?

2. Paul
   February 10, 2006 - 06:26 AM on February 10th, 2006

   The article also stated the following. Be fair, now. Also, anyone can post on Wikipedia, so the prevalence of false/misleading info could be high especially if motivated by political goals … from either side of the aisle.

   The office of Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., changed a description of the Minnesota Republican’s political leanings as a college student from “liberal Democrat” to “activist Democrat” and then to “active college student,” the Wikipedia investigation found.

   The investigation found that references to Coleman’s 98 percent pro-Bush voting record were removed, along with references to White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove.

3. PCD
   February 10, 2006 - 09:15 AM on February 10th, 2006

   I blogged over at Iowa Voice, Pg 2 about Wikipedia waking up to politicians and their staffs editing entries and having banned them from doing so in this article from the Scotsman.

4. Peejz
   February 10, 2006 - 09:16 AM on February 10th, 2006

   I posted changes from both sides of the aisle. Hence the Conrad Burns info…

5. Sasha
   February 10, 2006 - 11:30 AM on February 10th, 2006

   I’ve corrected information there. It’s a good idea, but there is no real way to make sure only good and accuarate is made available to the public.

   I wouldn’t make any bets based on information found at wikipedia.

6. Sasha
   February 10, 2006 - 11:04 PM on February 10th, 2006

   Thanks, PCD. Got your message from Monday that was all about this.

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Right Voices uses Gravatar to display individual comment author icons. If you'd like your own icon next to your name, then go to Gravatar.com and sign up - it's easy!

more »

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail