Getting Ready: Even Wikipedia has become the ground of political struggle. The encyclopedia "written by users", founded ten years ago, it was pulled to coat, so blatant, last Monday on television. By Lucia Annunziata, the transmission power, six episodes in the late evening on Rai Tre, we talk about the judiciary: guests the former justice minister Roberto Castelli, historical face - and television - the Northern League, and the magistrate Armando Spataro, the Milan prosecutor , formerly known anti-Mafia judge.
In comparison, the clash between the two, are now sparks. Castles, in his style, attacking the judges with his head down and the same Spataro, stigmatizing, to begin with, a text that the magistrate had read at the start of transmission (is the account of the judicial year at the Palazzo Venezia in 1940 "To us," replied the judiciary "fascist" to the Duce).
During his speech, he soon pulls out a iPad Castelli, "this beautiful magic box." It's a twist: to demonstrate that judges are dealt with policies ("community") and not to the laws of the State, the Northern League warns: "If a young person is now on Wikipedia that's what the Democratic Judiciary Law." Quote quote: "Among the associations of the Judiciary, the Judiciary is characterized by the Democratic ideological inspiration more from the left, always geared to the defense of the autonomy and independence of the judiciary from other branches of government." Not only that, the section under the heading Judiciary Democratic Ideology is also stated: "This Democratic Judiciary in the past has often found matching points of the Italian Communist Party in political and extra-parliamentary left, and parties such as Communist Refoundation, the Italian Communists and the current left-wing of the Democratic Party into the political current.
" The statement is strong! It is assumed that judges are historically linked Md even the extra-parliamentary left (rather than the courts has always opposed them). Yes, next to this statement, the encyclopedia online is also written, "[citation], notes that classical Wikipedia indicates the information is not verified, impromptu related to opinions rather than facts.
Castles do not read this, and wrong: but this is the only crime that can be attributed. Because everything else is true. Going for a check, one discovers that the text was inserted in 2007 and has survived to this day. It has now been removed - immediately after the broadcast - from someone else, which explains his decision: "The Ideology section was written carelessly and without source, and was used as a means of political critique in this association, I think Wikipedia as a tool requires of its authors to write more accurately and not 'in good faith or bad' words in freedom, which are then recruited or used by readers 'naive' or biased as fact.
" The encyclopedia part a discussion about it, many agree with those who have removed the text. It is not difficult, however, making further checks, figure out who was the author who had inserted the offending text. It is not recorded, but there is only your IP address (81.208.86.45, identification on the Internet), from which a user goes back to "Tamoil" (a consumer is shared by probably hundreds of users).
This user, as well as Democratic Judiciary has amended several sensitive items: Fabrizio Cicchitto, Enrico Berlinguer, Gianfranco Fini. Changes almost always without source, deployed and away from guide line of Wikipedia, so that other people invite him to behave properly: "Keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a blog! The only way to contribute to this encyclopedia is to help you grow in quality and strict neutrality, not to express personal opinions or general vehicular private messages through the voices.
" His interventions are so many factions that he left a "yellow card": "Dear 81.208.86.45 - warn older users - the next contribution is contrary to Wikipedia guidelines triggered a write lock on your users, so this is the last call to cooperate in a constructive manner. Please respect the work of others follow the rules and use common sense.
" Now the Judiciary Democratic voice on Wikipedia is, in fact, clean. The fact remains that an anonymous user has used a tool to insert the contents of all factions, and a member of the government has used these inappropriate content on television to attack the Italian judges (and incidentally, to do proper castle, not the Justice has several times had to do, and its proceedings, the online encyclopedia is not wrong, indeed: both sets of source).
It also poses a new problem. The use of Wikipedia as a source is not "neutral" of knowledge, but as a terrain of political struggle. Also from this policy must be careful when, as now, is only reduced to propaganda. 
In comparison, the clash between the two, are now sparks. Castles, in his style, attacking the judges with his head down and the same Spataro, stigmatizing, to begin with, a text that the magistrate had read at the start of transmission (is the account of the judicial year at the Palazzo Venezia in 1940 "To us," replied the judiciary "fascist" to the Duce).
During his speech, he soon pulls out a iPad Castelli, "this beautiful magic box." It's a twist: to demonstrate that judges are dealt with policies ("community") and not to the laws of the State, the Northern League warns: "If a young person is now on Wikipedia that's what the Democratic Judiciary Law." Quote quote: "Among the associations of the Judiciary, the Judiciary is characterized by the Democratic ideological inspiration more from the left, always geared to the defense of the autonomy and independence of the judiciary from other branches of government." Not only that, the section under the heading Judiciary Democratic Ideology is also stated: "This Democratic Judiciary in the past has often found matching points of the Italian Communist Party in political and extra-parliamentary left, and parties such as Communist Refoundation, the Italian Communists and the current left-wing of the Democratic Party into the political current.
" The statement is strong! It is assumed that judges are historically linked Md even the extra-parliamentary left (rather than the courts has always opposed them). Yes, next to this statement, the encyclopedia online is also written, "[citation], notes that classical Wikipedia indicates the information is not verified, impromptu related to opinions rather than facts.
Castles do not read this, and wrong: but this is the only crime that can be attributed. Because everything else is true. Going for a check, one discovers that the text was inserted in 2007 and has survived to this day. It has now been removed - immediately after the broadcast - from someone else, which explains his decision: "The Ideology section was written carelessly and without source, and was used as a means of political critique in this association, I think Wikipedia as a tool requires of its authors to write more accurately and not 'in good faith or bad' words in freedom, which are then recruited or used by readers 'naive' or biased as fact.
" The encyclopedia part a discussion about it, many agree with those who have removed the text. It is not difficult, however, making further checks, figure out who was the author who had inserted the offending text. It is not recorded, but there is only your IP address (81.208.86.45, identification on the Internet), from which a user goes back to "Tamoil" (a consumer is shared by probably hundreds of users).
This user, as well as Democratic Judiciary has amended several sensitive items: Fabrizio Cicchitto, Enrico Berlinguer, Gianfranco Fini. Changes almost always without source, deployed and away from guide line of Wikipedia, so that other people invite him to behave properly: "Keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a blog! The only way to contribute to this encyclopedia is to help you grow in quality and strict neutrality, not to express personal opinions or general vehicular private messages through the voices.
" His interventions are so many factions that he left a "yellow card": "Dear 81.208.86.45 - warn older users - the next contribution is contrary to Wikipedia guidelines triggered a write lock on your users, so this is the last call to cooperate in a constructive manner. Please respect the work of others follow the rules and use common sense.
" Now the Judiciary Democratic voice on Wikipedia is, in fact, clean. The fact remains that an anonymous user has used a tool to insert the contents of all factions, and a member of the government has used these inappropriate content on television to attack the Italian judges (and incidentally, to do proper castle, not the Justice has several times had to do, and its proceedings, the online encyclopedia is not wrong, indeed: both sets of source).
It also poses a new problem. The use of Wikipedia as a source is not "neutral" of knowledge, but as a terrain of political struggle. Also from this policy must be careful when, as now, is only reduced to propaganda.
- What inspires a poet? (22/04/2011)
- Wikipedia Experience: Contributing To The World's Largest Encyclopedia (20/04/2011)
- Wikipedia Commons has 10 milionth image upload! (21/04/2011)
- Wikipedia now a reliable source for political information? (18/04/2011)
- April 21, 2011 - Open Clusters in Monoceros, etc. (22/04/2011)
No comments:
Post a Comment