Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Politicians Behaving Unethically!

  1. Feb 9, 2006 #1

    Art

    User Avatar

    Politicians on Capital Hill have been found editing biographies on Wikipedia.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4695376.stm

    And they wonder why many politicians are held in such low esteem. :rolleyes:
     
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2006
  2. jcsd
  3. Feb 9, 2006 #2

    cronxeh

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I always thought Wiki couldn't be trusted 100%, but you can always trust the people to be narcissistic :biggrin:

    oh look at that full-teeth white smile.. mm-hmm :tongue2:
     
  4. Feb 9, 2006 #3
    You don't say! :eek: I am shocked. Shocked!
     
  5. Feb 9, 2006 #4

    Art

    User Avatar

    That's the sad part. Very few people are shocked. In fact we have come to expect it, yet these people have tremendous control over the general publics' lives and shape the future of the world.

    One would reasonably expect ones' elected representatives to set high standards for society to follow but instead often they are the ones lowering the bar. :frown:
     
  6. Feb 9, 2006 #5

    cronxeh

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I'm an honest, good guy overall, and I'd like to run for Senator oneday. Do I need a JD? Or even a college degree for that matter? I do care about what happens in this country and overall the rest of the world, and always feel like I cant trust any one of those representatives, unless its me.. :rolleyes:
     
  7. Feb 9, 2006 #6

    SOS2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    An important point is that hard copy encyclopedias (or for that matter text books) cannot be edited by just anyone to fit their world view or preferences. It's too bad this is going on, because an online version allows for rapid, constant update of information for free. If they hired professional historians, etc. and made it write-protected, updates would be slower, and they would have to charge subscription fees to cover the cost. Perhaps they should.
     
  8. Feb 10, 2006 #7

    BobG

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I think the Wikipedia edits are just another in a bad trend for the internet. I remember during the Schiavo controversy, it was virtually impossible to find a neutral source on Judge Greer. Any search of his name yielded several pages of hate sites. That's the equivalent of jamming a radio signal to prevent any intelligent information getting from getting through. While Greer's name was the worst example, there's been other incidents where it takes a lot effort to find real information among the garbage sites whose sole purpose seems to be to bury information (site after site that has the same info in the search preview just has to be more than coincidence).
     
  9. Feb 10, 2006 #8

    Art

    User Avatar

    It's a tricky one. As the article says there are already 1.8 million entries in Wiki. It would be enormously expensive to fully oversee something that big and making it subscriber only to finance such a task would probably only kill it. :frown:

    On the bright side the article also said that in areas related to science it was as accurate as the encyclopedia Brittanica.
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2006
  10. Feb 10, 2006 #9
    Noone who wants power can be trusted to wield it.
     
  11. Feb 10, 2006 #10
    Yes, is looks close to unmanageable. But since Wikipedia uses the general public as its source of information, at this time it could also use a voting system to accept or reject changes (like the Urban Dictionary). Visitors might see both the content of an entry and the latest suggested changes. Those who already know something about the subject matter can then vote to accept or reject the suggested change(s) which is then accepted only if a good number of visitors approve and few disapprove of it. This can be refined to give more weight to submissions from IPs with a good track record. I'm sure it can be refined in other ways too. This requires software enhancements but not a lot of manual checks by the staff.
     
  12. Feb 10, 2006 #11

    cronxeh

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Yeah.. but unless you believe in religious dogmas about people being posessed and having double faced personalities, I'm pretty sure there are people out there who have a better value system and speak their mind, unable to hide the truth from their constituents. I mean think about it, if you were voting for a Senator, won't you want him to openly talk about the problems that country faces, unless its classified, and brainstorm possible solutions and occasionally ask his voters for input?
     
  13. Feb 10, 2006 #12

    Art

    User Avatar

    . Yes you're right - Here's an example. Ignoring the rights and wrongs in this particular example it shows how SEO marketing can be used to corrupt the internet search engines to either promote information or hide it in a forest of junk
     
  14. Feb 10, 2006 #13

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Art, this raises what I think is an even broader issue (if you think this side-tracks discussion too much, let me know and I'll split it off, but I'm starting here because it seems pertinent to the example you've cited). I have often wondered how much oversight there is of Congressional aides. When you think about who does the real leg-work in Congress and has a pretty strong say-so in what goes on, it's the aides more than the Congresspersons. These are not elected posts, and while we assume those we elect are hiring aides with views similar to their own and thus similar to those we've voted for, I wonder how much "damage" can a couple of aides do by selectively presenting data to the Congressperson they work for? It's just something I wonder. Does anyone here know more first-hand what goes on with respect to the Congressional staff and who checks up on them?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Politicians Behaving Unethically!
  1. Lying politicians (Replies: 112)

  2. Outsider politicians (Replies: 0)

Loading...