Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama supporters at Wikipedia have censored information about his “transparency”
wordpress ^ | July 29, 2014 | Dan from Squirrel Hill

Posted on 07/30/2014 5:44:29 AM PDT by grundle

Obama supporters at Wikipedia have censored information about his “transparency”

Wikipedia’s article Presidency of Barack Obama has a section called “Transparency.” The section contains various claims by Obama about how supposedly transparent his administration is.

A crazy person who lives in my apartment building added some examples of Obama’s non-transparency to the section. However, the Obama supporters at Wikipedia erased them, and banned the account of the person who had added them.

This is the content that was added and then erased:

In February 2013, ABC News White House reporter Ann Compton, who covered Presidents Ford, Carter, Reagan, Clinton, both Bushes, and Obama, said:

“The president’s day-to-day policy development… is almost totally opaque to the reporters trying to do a responsible job of covering it. There are no readouts from big meetings he has with people from the outside, and many of them aren’t even on his schedule. This is different from every president I covered. This White House goes to extreme lengths to keep the press away.”

In October 2013, Compton said that Obama was the

“least transparent of the seven presidents I’ve covered in terms of how he does his daily business.”

In May 2013, the New York Times wrote:

“With the decision to label a Fox News television reporter a possible ‘co-conspirator’ in a criminal investigation of a news leak, the Obama administration has moved beyond protecting government secrets to threatening fundamental freedoms of the press to gather news.”

In May 2013, the Washington Post wrote:

“To treat a reporter as a criminal for doing his job — seeking out information the government doesn’t want made public — deprives Americans of the First Amendment freedom on which all other constitutional rights are based.”

In October 2013, New York Times reporter David Sanger said:

“This is the most closed, control-freak administration I’ve ever covered.”

In August 2013, the Obama administration illegally seized documents from the home of Audrey Hudson, a reporter who lived in Shady Side, Maryland.

Michael Oreskes, a senior managing editor at Associated Press, said:

“The Obama administration has been extremely controlling and extremely resistant to journalistic intervention.”

In February 2014, the Obama administration announced that it planned to put government employees inside TV stations and newspaper offices to monitor their activities.

In March 2014, New York Times reporter James Risen said Obama was

“the greatest enemy of press freedom that we have encountered in at least a generation.”

During one year of Obama’s presidency, from 2013 to 2014, the U.S. ranking on the World Press Freedom Index fell by 14 places, dropping from #32 to #46.

In November 2013, 38 major news organizations sent a letter to the Obama administration complaining about its lack of transparency. The letter was singed by all the major broadcast and cable networks, wire services, online services and newspapers, including the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the McClatchy Co., which owns 30 daily newspapers across the country.

In July 2014, 38 media organizations (not necessarily the same ones) sent a letter to the Obama administration complaining about its lack of transparency. That letter can be read here.

In July 2009, White House reporter Helen Thomas said:

“The point is the control from here. We have never had that in the White House. And we have had some control but not this control. I mean I’m amazed, I’m amazed at you people who call for openness and transparency and have controlled… Nixon didn’t try to do that… They couldn’t control (the media). They didn’t try. What the hell do they think we are, puppets? They’re supposed to stay out of our business. They are our public servants. We pay them.”



TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: mediabias; obama

1 posted on 07/30/2014 5:44:30 AM PDT by grundle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: grundle

2 posted on 07/30/2014 5:48:24 AM PDT by Diogenesis (The EXEMPT Congress is complicit in the absence of impeachment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

Wikipedia is leftist. Unfortunately, it’s a one-of-a-kind resource upon which most the Free World relies for information.


3 posted on 07/30/2014 5:49:14 AM PDT by BlueStateRightist (Government is best which governs least.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

How hard is it to re-post this on Wikipedia?

Perhaps if different, unique Freepers posted this each day for a month or two, Wikipedia might get the hint.


4 posted on 07/30/2014 5:52:25 AM PDT by BwanaNdege ( "Our Emperor may have no clothes, but doesn't he have a wonderful tan" - MSM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: grundle

Loons are in charge of Wikipedia. They are little tin-pot dictators, anonymous and nasty as hell.


6 posted on 07/30/2014 5:53:17 AM PDT by miss marmelstein (Richard Lives Yet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

It’s long been known as wiki graffiti.


7 posted on 07/30/2014 5:54:40 AM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

Wikipedia is just like Democratic Underground when it comes to what happens if you try to post something critical about Our Glorious Leader.


8 posted on 07/30/2014 5:55:44 AM PDT by Bubba_Leroy (The Obamanation Continues)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

The Ministry of Truth ensures that all records are corrected and updated to align with the Party’s ideology.


9 posted on 07/30/2014 5:56:14 AM PDT by agatheringstorm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

Wiki is a great resource if you’re looking up lists of, say, Super Bowl champions, spaceflights, or Duck Dynasty episodes. As for political information, it’s a bit more problematic.


10 posted on 07/30/2014 6:00:34 AM PDT by NCC-1701 (You have your fear, which might become reality; and you have Godzilla, which IS reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: grundle

What transparency?


11 posted on 07/30/2014 6:01:13 AM PDT by rfreedom4u (Your feelings don't trump my free speech!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

His supporters who serve as moderators on other web boards eagerly slap down any hint of the idea that he ain’t the greatest thing since sliced bread.


12 posted on 07/30/2014 6:08:32 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlueStateRightist

Then most of the free world is stupid.


13 posted on 07/30/2014 6:22:46 AM PDT by logi_cal869
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BlueStateRightist

On anything even remotely political or any kind of hot current social issue Wikipedia is decidedly leftist/liberal. I don’t trust it/use it for anything but technical, more cut and dried information.


14 posted on 07/30/2014 6:25:25 AM PDT by ThunderSleeps (Stop obarma now! Stop the hussein - insane agenda!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: grundle

The scumbag Obamarats are trying to change history just as the Islamarats in the Middle East.


15 posted on 07/30/2014 6:33:00 AM PDT by SgtHooper (This is not my tag!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

"I'm okay as long as I don't lose power at midterms."

16 posted on 07/30/2014 6:37:26 AM PDT by Liz (Another Clinton administration? Are you nuts?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: rfreedom4u
What transparency?

You can't see it because it's "transparent".

17 posted on 07/30/2014 6:58:03 AM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (America is not a refugee camp! It is my home!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BlueStateRightist

They also censor anti AGW facts.


18 posted on 07/30/2014 8:01:36 AM PDT by redangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: grundle

Desperately trying to make everyone forget about the drivel you posted in this thread?

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3186797/posts


19 posted on 07/30/2014 8:42:20 AM PDT by shibumi (Cover it with gas and set it on fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

Heh heh. Great image!


20 posted on 07/30/2014 1:29:47 PM PDT by grundle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege

That particular article only allows people who have had accounts for at least four days, with at least 10 previous edits in other articles, to edit it. I had created several new accounts to wait out the four day wait, but they got banned before the four day period was up. But that doesn’t mean others can’t try.


21 posted on 07/30/2014 1:33:30 PM PDT by grundle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege
Wikipedia doesn't work that way, which is why the stuff was removed in the first place. You are not supposed to simply edit an entry that other editors have made without discussing it on the talk page for the entry first. If you don't do it through the proper channels, the article gets reverted back to the way it was.

Now, that is how it is supposed to work, in theory. In practice, if you do go through the proper channels, it is going to be hard to get any edits that leftists don't like approved, because lefties dominate among the wikipedia editors.

22 posted on 07/30/2014 3:34:11 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson