reliable source

From wired.co.uk/article/wikipedia-fake-news-disinformation:

while other platforms are mired in debate over the borders between free speech, propaganda and trolling, Wikipedia has taken a different route from the onset: community-driven fact checking. One of the platform’s three core policies is verifiability, not truth”, and it requires every claim on Wikipedia be attributed to a reliable source. Any question on the meaning of truth” is deemed moot: either you have a source for your claims, or you don’t. (Wikipedia editors have even debated whether the claim that the sky is blue needs a citation or not.) The resulting debate is much less politicised than the one taking place on social media. Wikipedia’s community standards have created the conditions for a shared reality.

Up next civic responsibility From Roger McNamee’s book Zucked: Waking Up to the Facebook Catastrophe: The internet platforms have harvested fifty years of trust and goodwill the dead What would the dead want from us Watching from their cave? Would they have us forever howling? Would they have us rave Or disfigure ourselves, or be
Latest posts tendency to want to do something changing minds donato sansone concatenation comfort in confront our errors empty for nothing is fixed eighteen pandemic intimacy one fine day too old to dream sniff the screen to question your knowledge in my body ige consumption small acts of transformation why dance matters now running and avoiding scale memory is like a wikipedia page not standing on your own stumbling across down autobiography in five short chapters the pleasure of making things Corporeal Epistemics two people together blog post two people together g the invention of clothing embodied and disembodied