Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-07-29/In the media



Is Wikipedia a battleground in the culture wars?
In The Conversation, Russell Blackford, Wikipedia editor and Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Newcastle, writes about the phrase "cultural Marxism" and his involvement in the related discussion on Wikipedia. Last December, Wikipedia's article on cultural Marxism was deleted following a contentious debate that spilled over onto User talk:Jimbo Wales after Wales reopened a closed discussion on the article's fate. The term is now a redirect to a section of the article on the Frankfurt School of philosophy called "conspiracy theory". Dr. Blackford writes that the phrase has been embraced by a number of "right-wing ideologues", including the terrorist Anders Breivik, which use it to refer to "a concerted effort by an elite...to destroy Western morality and civilization." (Indeed, a number of right-wing blogs and message boards angrily denounced the December deletion, referring to it as "censorship".) However, Blackford explains that much of what is labeled "cultural Marxism" is often "nothing more than left-wing cultural criticism".

Blackford also discusses scholarly uses of the phrase, but distinguishes it from its ideological use. This use, he writes, "bears only a slight resemblance to the grand, semi-conspiratorial, civilization-wrecking ideology described by Breivik and others." He traces this use as far back as 1973, to the sociologist and philosopher Trent Schroyer's book The Critique of Domination. However, academic use of this term does not appear to have been consistent. Blackford notes "Its meaning remains somewhat unclear and contested, but there is at least some commonality of understanding." On Wikipedia, Blackford writes, "polemicists" have denied these "legitimate uses" of the phrase. According to him, there is an "intransigent, vehement, and (to date) successful opposition from some well-entrenched Wikipedia editors to the existence of any 'cultural Marxism' article." He believes this is a sign of larger issues with the encyclopedia, which "has itself become a site for culture wars, with editors representing rival political tribes frequently attempting to impose their respective narratives as the official version of one or another cultural controversy." Because of this, "its articles have little credibility when it comes to explaining contemporary cultural and political controversies." Another Wikipedia editor who frequently writes about cultural topics, Mark Bernstein, dissented from Blackford's viewpoint. Dr. Bernstein told the Signpost "as Prof. Blackford observes, contemporary right-wing extremists have latched on to the phrase to mean something entirely different from what Blackford’s earlier sources intended — and the early sources never used the term very extensively or to great effect." He notes that none of the varied uses of the term "have gained much traction or proven to be particularly helpful outside the originators’ immediate circle."

Bernstein supports the deletion of the article, writing that "An encyclopedia doesn't require a page for every phrase, slogan, or term of art ever proposed, and the project always has to balance the cost of creating and maintaining a page against its benefit." In this case, Wikipedia is "facing an onslaught from organized extremists who want to exploit its pages for their own purposes", and should delete "at least for now, a page that was never essential or indeed particularly useful". He adds that the article can be added again "if monographs and journals in the coming years find the term useful". (July 27)



In brief

 * The 19th century persists: The Guardian reports that the article for Indigenous Australian rules football player Adam Goodes continues to be the target of racist vandalism (see previous Signpost coverage). (July 29)
 * Larger donation ads: VentureBeat reports that the Wikimedia Foundation is now experimenting with full-page messages soliciting donations. The article was originally titled "Lack of donations drives Wikipedia to test massive new ads" before it was corrected.  (July 27)
 * Top Gear avoids Ofcom censure: British media reports that Ofcom has declared the BBC2 television program Top Gear was not in breach of "content standards for television". A complaint was made about a February 2014 episode, the first of series 21, in which a sign called "Pikey's Peak" was displayed.  Pikey is an ethnic slur directed at Irish Travellers, but it is also a slang term roughly meaning "cheap", in this case referring to Richard Hammond's choice to drive a Vauxhall Nova SRi.  In its decision, Ofcom noted the citation of an older version of the Wikipedia article for the term "pikey" by the BBC Trust in its response to the complaint. (July 27)
 * Printing out the apocalypse: In Matter, Choire Sicha wonders what Wikipedia articles he would print out in the face of a climate change-created dystopia. He writes "I put the Wikipedia pages in for Novels, as well as Fiction, and also Literary Criticism, Literary Theory and also Literary Modernism, just because it seems like it would be really agonizing if everyone had to go through all that again." (July 27)

Do you want to contribute to "In the media" by writing a story or even just an "in brief" item? Edit next week's edition in the Newsroom or contact the editor.
 * Local editing: "Let’s edit Tulare’s wiki page", urges the Visalia Times-Delta, in order to make the article Tulare, California "a little bit more thorough and — honestly — more exciting." (July 27)
 * More Parliament editing: PinkNews reports that the Wikipedia article for MP Stewart Jackson was edited by an IP address registered to the Parliament of the United Kingdom to remove material concerning "a disdainful message he sent a lesbian constituent."  (July 25)
 * Maintaining your own article: In Forbes, author Rob Asghar writes about the Wikipedia article of an unnamed "prominent leadership guru". Asghar writes that the article had been "hijacked" by proponents of EST, a large-group awareness training program that had its heyday in the 1970s, to over-emphasize minor historical links to the guru and EST.   Asghar writes that he attempted to remove the text but was thwarted by Wikipedia editors who said "If you think the balance is wrong, it’s up to you to add other info that helps bring everything into the right balance," so he and others improved the article.  Asghar concludes "It’s a helpful reminder that your personal brand is a story that’s either being told by you—or by a host of other forces who aren’t going to emphasize what’s most important to you." (July 23)
 * PR editing: LinkedIn offers PR people "10 things you need to know about Wikipedia" (July 23)
 * The Weedman goeth: New Jersey marijuana enthusiast Ed Forchion, better known as "NJWeedman", complained in The Trentonian about the deletion of his Wikipedia article last year. Weedman wrote that he was "wiped out of cyberhistory" and compared the deletion to "Texas...rewriting its history books". The article was deleted following an AfD discussion. A number of editors felt that being a perennial candidate for office with the Legalize Marijuana Party and his frequent arrests and other legal actions related to marijuana did not amount to sufficient notability  (July 22)
 * Financial editing: The Tribune de Genève reports that an account identifying itself as belonging to the Zurich Cantonal Bank deleted a section from the bank's article on the German Wikipedia regarding a 2006-2007 financial scandal.  (July 9)