• Firetail

    That's much the problem with Wikipedia too. No matter how right an opinion is, if those with influence and control want to believe something, there is no chance to offer an opposing side of the argument. Their always be neutral policy is a joke and it won't be any different on this news version.

    • AdelleChattre

      With Wikipedia, at least, one can rely on the discretion of the most authoritative of the collaborative editors, and a sound process in place for contending with what’s contentious. I mean, we’re not comparing Wikipedia to Encyclopedia Brittanica any longer, obviously, but let’s compare that to the premium brands in the commodification of truth, outfits like Politifact. If Politifact checks out mentally whilst trying to assign a truth-rating, there’s nothing you can do. At the very least, Wikipedia is participatory in a way that a journalistic side-project website run by the Tampa Bay Times never will be.