CNN MSNBC, Washington Post, NYT and on and on...I think the problem with Wikipedia though is that it sells itself as an apolitical educational site much better than the obvious propagandist scum.
The left have a single big advantage in that they are over-represented in academia and information technology. I would say that they dominate on the internet because they are smelly, sedentary ne'er-do-wells while the right tend to be out in the real world actually doing things but perhaps that's unfair.
But anyway this is at the core of what they do-control language and opinion, to alter reality to their satisfaction. The over-focus on fascism and Nazism and the glossing over of e.g. Soviet genocide has become so endemic now it's as if history has been actually rewritten.
Depends on the industry and where your cutoff is for "right." I know conservatives making big money developing proprietary software for finance that you'll never see or hear about. It's the public-facing products that are largely driven by those who identify as more socially liberal (though the loud lest ones tend to be more towards the end of the horseshoe).
> I would say that they dominate on the internet because they are smelly, sedentary ne'er-do-wells
I would argue that it's demographics.
There is a rural-urban divide around politics (urban people are more left-wing, and that effect increases depending on size of the city), an age divide (young people are more left-wing), and a wealth divide (wealthier people are more left-wing).
Now, which demographic groups would you say are most likely to (1) have access to the internet, and (2) be able to spend the most time on it? You guessed it - young, wealthy urbanites. Youth is associated with digital literacy (and lack of job means more free time), wealth can also be associated with more leisure time and better connection speeds, and urbanism is also associated with access to the internet.
I want to strongly highlight the urban divide, because it's something often overlooked, but it is one of the biggest influences on political values. Yes, you *can* be conservative in a city, but overall city-dwellers have a much higher average of "progressives" than village-dwellers. By all means, we could argue why (is it just because progressives move to cities - i.e. correlation doesn't equal causation - or is it an actual effect of the social atmosphere?), but it's still a correlation.
Either way, it is certain that urban populations will have higher internet usage than rural populations, by virtue of having better connection speeds due to the infrastructure, being more likely to have any access, and being more likely to have had access for longer. On that side of things, just think of where the initial users of the internet will have came from (once it gained mainstream appeal): New York, Los Angeles, Chicago; London, Berlin, Madrid, Paris etc. - the size of these cities allows their populations to dominate, and their worldview to dominate also, especially when the rural populations that would often counterbalance them in their respective countries simply haven't gotten access (regardless of wealth, regardless of age) to the infrastructure at that given point.
> The over-focus on fascism and Nazism and the glossing over of e.g. Soviet genocide has become so endemic now it's as if history has been actually rewritten.
It still baffles me that you can openly be a commie, but you're done for if some confused retard thinks you're a "nazi".
I've noticed a lot of it lately, totally unrelated things adding in bias, like an article on ball point pens will say something like, "and trump used a ball point pen to agree to the attack on the capitol."
Wiki's always sucked for relying on secondary published sources anyhow. Look up the Haymarket Riot and how they keep reporting misinformation and even threatened to ban the expert on the riots who proved most media was wrong.
The wiki article on Chivalry has some arbitrary contributions to affiliate it with the KKK like:
>"Many considered lynching chivalrous.[66]"
There's a lot of modern opinion with questionable citation that seeps into the historical pages.
16 comments
41 u/TheBanshee 21 Feb 2021 11:30
6 u/Ryaniskira 22 Feb 2021 03:42
9 u/PATRIOTSRADIOSIGNALS 22 Feb 2021 03:59
2 u/SharedTVWisdom 23 Feb 2021 20:44
11 u/None 21 Feb 2021 13:00
5 u/soltra 21 Feb 2021 13:22
3 u/Wenis 21 Feb 2021 23:16
1 u/TTTA 23 Feb 2021 10:22
4 u/animuniel 21 Feb 2021 17:40
9 u/None 21 Feb 2021 17:47
7 u/christianmusicreleases 21 Feb 2021 13:52
6 u/IGotAGoodUsername 21 Feb 2021 17:10
4 u/gutfounderedgal 21 Feb 2021 17:25
2 u/PATRIOTSRADIOSIGNALS 22 Feb 2021 04:05