Criticism of Conservapedia

From Wikinfo

Jump to: navigation, search


Search for "Criticism_of_Conservapedia" on Wikipedia  • Wikimedia Commons • Wiktionary • Wikiquote • Wikibooks • Mediawiki Wikia • Wikitravel • Google Advanced Search • Yahoo Advanced Search • WorldCat Advanced Search • Amazon • Recent NY Times • Older NY Times.

Main article: Conservapedia

Conservapedia, the conservative-leaning, Christian-leaning wiki encyclopedia project written from a conservative, Conservative Christian, and American viewpoint started Andrew Schlafly, son of conservative activist and Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly, has been criticized for its bias, racism and homophobia.

Contents

Wikipedia co-founder's views

Wikipedia's co-creator Jimmy Wales says that he has no objections to the project, stating "free culture knows no bounds," while acknowledging that sites such as Conservapedia are directly in line with Wikipedia's goals.[1] Wales denied Schlafly's claims of bias on Wikipedia.[2]

Jimmy Wales has raised concerns about the fact that the project is not licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) or a similar copyleft license, stating that "People who contribute [to Conservapedia] are giving them full control of the content, which may lead to unpleasant results".[2]

Factual inaccuracies

Two Conservapedia editors were quoted as giving favorable views of Conservapedia in a June 2007 Los Angeles Times article about the website.[3] However, the Conservapedia project has come under significant criticism for factual inaccuracies[4][5][6] and factual relativism.[5] Conservapedia has also been compared to CreationWiki, a wiki written from the perspective of creationism.[7][8] Tom Flanagan, a conservative professor of political science at the University of Calgary, has argued that Conservapedia is more about religion than conservatism and that it "is far more guilty of the crime they're attributing to Wikipedia [than Wikipedia itself.]"[2] Its scope as an encyclopedia, according to its founders, "offers a historical record from a Christian and conservative perspective."[9] APC magazine reports this to be representative of Conservapedia's own problem with bias.[10] The project has also been criticized for promoting a dichotomy between conservatism and liberalism and for promoting relativism with the false dilemma that there "often are two equally valid interpretations of the facts."[5]

Racism and homophobia

Allegations of racism and homophobia have also been raised against Conservapedia.[11] Brian Murphy, writing for the Ohio State University student newspaper The Lantern, considered Conservapedia's statement about Democratic senator and 2008 presidential candidate Barack Obama that he "has no clear personal achievement that cannot be explained as the likely result of affirmative action" as "idiotic and despicable".[12] Some Conservapedia editors urged that it be changed or deleted, but Schlafly responded by asserting that the Harvard Law Review uses racial quotas and by stating: "The statement about affirmative action is accurate and will remain in the entry."[13] Bryan Ochalla, writing for The Advocate LGBT magazine, referred to the project as "Wikipedia for the bigoted."[14] On The Daily Show, a satirical news program on U.S. cable network Comedy Central, comedian and regular correspondent Lewis Black commented about the claim on the Conservapedia calling homosexuality "an immoral sexual lifestyle" on its article: "On Conservapedia, 'gay' sounds way more interesting!"[15]

Breast cancer/abortion editing controversy

In April 2007, Dr. Peter Lipson, a doctor of internal medicine, attempted to edit the article on breast cancer to include evidence against Conservapedia's statement that abortion raises a woman's health risks but found his medical credentials being questioned by Schlafly and other Conservapedia administrators, all of whom ended the debate by deleting Lipson's edits and blocking Lipson's account.[3] Consequentially, Dr. Lipson and several editors started a rival website, RationalWiki, from which they monitor and comment on Conservapedia.

Vandalism and parody articles

Some members of RationalWiki have admitted to having vandalized Conservapedia.[3][16]

Wired magazine reported that Conservapedia was "attracting lots of derisive comments on blogs and a growing number of phony articles written by mischief makers."[7] Iain Thomson, writing in Information World Review, has written that "leftist subversives" may have been creating deliberate parody entries.[17] In November 2007, what is believed to be an automated click bot attack struck Conservapedia, driving many of their homosexuality-related articles into the top ten most viewed pages on the site.[18][19]


Slant of articles

Some of the articles border on the libellous (even allowing for political slant).

References

  1. ^ Biever, Celeste (2007-02-26). "A conservative rival for Wikipedia?". New Scientist. http://www.newscientist.com/blog/technology/2007/02/conservative-rival-for-wikipedia.html. 
  2. ^ a b c
  3. ^ a b c Simon, Stephanie (2007-06-22). "Conservapedia touted as 'a conservative encyclopedia'". Los Angeles Times. http://pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/rss/s_513929.html. Retrieved on 2007-11-02. 
  4. ^ Mackey, Rob (2007-03-08). "Conservapedia: The Word Says It All". New York Times. http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/08/conservapedia-the-word-says-it-all/. Retrieved on 2007-03-09. 
  5. ^ a b c the notion "that there's always a second, equally valid interpretation of the facts." Clarke, Conor. (2007). "A fact of one's own". The Guardian, March 1.
  6. ^ Read, Brock. (2007). "A Wikipedia for the Right Wing" Chronicle of Higher Education, March 2.
  7. ^ a b Calore, Michael. (2007). What Would Jesus Wiki?. Wired Magazine, February 28.
  8. ^
  9. ^ ECT: Conservapedia Retrieved on 2007-8-20
  10. ^ Wikipedia vs Conservapedia APC Magazine Accessed October 5, 2007
  11. ^ Caleca, Ben (2008-05-17). "Conservapedia: Taking a Stand for Oppressed WASPs everywhere". The Michigan Daily. http://apps.michigandaily.com/blogs/thepodium/?p=498. Retrieved on 2008-05-19. 
  12. ^ Murphy, Brian (February 25, 2008), "Obama represents genuine change for weary Americans", The Lantern, http://media.www.thelantern.com/media/storage/paper333/news/2008/02/25/Opinion/Obama.Represents.Genuine.Change.For.Weary.Americans-3232267.shtml 
  13. ^ Schlafly, Andrew (17 February, 2008). ""Talk:Barack Obama"". Conservapedia. http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Barack_Obama. Retrieved on 2008-03-27. 
  14. ^ Bryan Ochalla, "Wikipedia for the bigoted." The Advocate, March 25, 2008, p. 12.
  15. ^ "Episode 12087". The Daily Show. Comedy Central. 2007-06-27.
  16. ^ "Conservapedia". RationalWiki. 2008-04-22. http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Conservapedia&oldid=152658. Retrieved on 2008-04-22. 
  17. ^
  18. ^ "Top ten most viewed pages on Wikipedia and Conservapedia". Boing Boing. http://www.boingboing.net/2007/11/21/top-ten-most-viewed.html. Retrieved on 2007-11-22. 
  19. ^ "Conservapedia, Homosexuality, and pranked statistics". Infothought (Seth Finkelstein). http://sethf.com/infothought/blog/archives/001282.html. Retrieved on 2007-11-23. 

External links

Article adapted from the NPOV article on Wikipedia on Conservapedia

Retrieved from "http://www.wikinfo.org/index.php/Criticism_of_Conservapedia"