This is literally where we are right now.

My MAGA parents told me that they consume news “from both sides”. When pressed to name a single source that they consider on the left, they could not. They didn’t even try to say “CNN” or some shit, they simply could not come up with a single source.

So thankfully, they recognized their irrationality, and are no longer MAGA.

Lol jk 🥲

Maybe they can host it outside the U.S til they sort out their reality issues

Left wing bias = says objectively true things about me I don’t like.

I mean, there’s definitely an Americanized liberal valence to Wikipedia editing, primarily because the website is administered and edited by a bunch of libertarian-leaning liberals. But that’s not the only source of editing. In fact, the primary problem with Wikipedia is that there are so many blind spots the admins can’t track and such a huge incentive to fudge history in your own favor. The idea that the website is objective is fucking horseshit and instances of manipulation are well-documented.

Wikipedia Scanner – the brainchild of Cal Tech computation and neural-systems graduate student Virgil Griffith – offers users a searchable database that ties millions of anonymous Wikipedia edits to organizations where those edits apparently originated, by cross-referencing the edits with data on who owns the associated block of internet IP addresses.

Inspired by news last year that Congress members’ offices had been editing their own entries, Griffith says he got curious, and wanted to know whether big companies and other organizations were doing things in a similarly self-interested vein.

…

Griffith thus downloaded the entire encyclopedia, isolating the XML-based records of anonymous changes and IP addresses. He then correlated those IP addresses with public net-address lookup services such as ARIN, as well as private domain-name data provided by IP2Location.com.

The result: A database of 34.4 million edits, performed by 2.6 million organizations or individuals ranging from the CIA to Microsoft to Congressional offices, now linked to the edits they or someone at their organization’s net address has made.

Some of this appears to be transparently self-interested, either adding positive, press release-like material to entries, or deleting whole swaths of critical material.

Cruz’s problem is that he’s wildly unpopular. Consequently, the site tends to be bombarded by folks posting “Ted Cruz fucked it again” tags to his biography far faster than his own team can polish his hagiography and take down negative news bits. If he was less high profile or more popular, he wouldn’t have this problem.

Reality tends to have a strong left wing bias indeed.