The global network to build a fake narrative regarding Bharat is based on a strategy of Circular Argument of Authority, a term coined by Dr.Koenraad Elst. Know more about it in this short video.
The global network to build a fake narrative regarding Bharat is based on a strategy of Circular Argument of Authority, a term coined by Dr.Koenraad Elst. Know more about it in this short video.
We are aware that mainstream English media has been projecting a totally one-sided picture of 3-day Delhi riots that took place in Feb 2020, going to the extent of calling it a pogrom. Western media has gleefully picked up these stories to plant Hindu-phobic stories of Delhi riots. They have totally ignored terror against Hindus, the acid and petrol bomb factories, stone-pelting, attack and gruesome killing of Police and Intelligence officers, and the build-up of `jehadi speeches’ of over 2.5 months leading to deliberate orchestrated riots, which were timed to the visit of US President Donald Trump to Delhi. Senior journalists too revealed that they are being scouted by western media for slanted selective Hindu-phobic stories of the riots.
We acknowledge `Know the Nation’ which presented the following tweets with pictures which speak for themselves.
Read some books on the doctrine and history of Islamic imperialism in India.
The Story of Islamic Imperialism in India
Twitter thread by @Soumyadipta
Years ago, my friend and I collaborated to write an investigative article on Wikipedia.
The plan was to expose the entrenched gang of Wikipedia editors who earn money by creating and editing Wikipedia pages.
A Bollywood producer helped me with the contact of an agency. The plan was to pose as the PR agency of a relatively unknown actress and create a wiki page as per our instructions on email.
The agency demanded an annual contract of 30K for keeping the page up and purge unwanted edits.
A gang of about 50 Indian editors are on top of a chain of editors and they have complete control over Wikipedia . The top 50 editors are mostly from IT companies with much free time on their hands and they are on Wiki the whole day.
Google changes its algorithm frequently but they used to heavily favour Wiki because it is an open source, publicly edited charity platform.
Here’s a payment structure for these Wiki editors in the command chain:
1. Top Editor: 30% (one)
2. Senior editor: 25%
3. Mid editor: 15%
4. Young editor: 10%
5. Agency: 20%
1. The top editors make about 5 lakhs every month as “consultants”.
2. The agencies make about 3 lakh per month.
3. Students are enrolled as interns and may later on become mid-level editors.
Wikipedia is a big business opportunity, hence tightly controlled
Ans: It takes years to climb up the hierarchy.
Wikipedia gives you badges, stars etc in recognition of your work.
You won’t get promotions unless you have the tacit support of the “gang”
There is a very well-known process here
If your edits get reversed or deleted frequently then Wikipedia understands that you are not a talent.
This is the game that is played on the platform.
If they want you out, they will reverse your edits.
Backed with data, you edit the article on Wikipedia only to find that it has been reversed the next day.
Imagine this happening to you frequently. Day after day.
You get frustrated and angry.
Right?
What is the point of research and editing articles if they get deleted?
Wikipedia has a system where you can “Talk” to your “seniors” about why your edits have disappeared.
This is where the bullying happens.
It is here that the senior editors will bully you by clever usage of words.
They’ll tell you that your edits were “pretty pointless” or “vague”
These editors ensure by one method or the other that their narrative on a particular page does not change.
This is mainly the case with political pages.
They’re staunch Leftists and their job is ensure that Wikipedia doesn’t say nice things about non-left personalities and media
For personalities, they will highlight their flaws.
For example, create a separate section for an unverified allegation levelled against him just by citing a newspaper report.
But for others, they would ignore it
They scour the internet for publicly available articles that show you in bad light. Once they get such an article, a new editor will edit and the senior editors will ensure that it sticks to the page
They will form a team. Usually such teams are formed on secret chat rooms outside of Wikipedia.
They will ensure that the edits come from different locations. So it’s impossible to figure out that it’s a coordinated attack
BJP leaders, personalities who publicly support Narendra Modi and those who speak in favour of majority Hindus often have derogatory edits approved.
Wikipedia Editing is actually a game of citations from publicly available sources. The hidden cheat sheet is approving the citations that align with your narrative.
Then there are Administrators who are like an Editor-in-Chief of a Media house. They have ultimate powers.
Currently there are 1,144 administrators of English Wikipedia
Wikipedia had to ban the user because it was proven that he was running a mafia syndicate to favour a business house.
Wikipedia apologised after the user was outed.
The obvious question is: what are Wikipedia bosses doing about this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Systemic_bias
Not only does ideological bias and bullying exist on Wikipedia. There has been many cases of sexual harassment and targeted gender harassment on Wikipedia. Female editors have been harassed by the gangs of male editors. Here is a documented case from 2015.
A prominent criticism of Wiki is its gender gap and unfair targeting of women public figures, eg, women of colour.
Here’s a case study of how a scientist’s page kept on disappearing from Wikipedia and the battle to restore it. There are many such cases.
Wikipedia has done nothing to check their platform of biases that come in many forms: political narrative, gender, historical perspective, religion etc
The complex wheels of Wikipedia grind very slowly. It is effectively the opposite of twitter in this regard. Twitter is therefore prone to angry mobs and extreme disinformation. Wikipedia can make mistakes, of course. But it is a very different environment from social media.
Please add your experiences in the comments section if you are (were) a Wikipedia editor.
Please ask Wikipedia to be neutral or else they are doing a disservice to humanity.
Prasar Bharati News Service Breaking :
Police complaints filed against The Wall Street Journal & Maharashtra Police for “defaming particular religion & spreading communal tension” with respect to alleged misreporting on #DelhiViolence & murder of IB official Ankit Sharma.
Wall Street Journal had quoted Ankit’s brother Ankur as having said that Ankit was killed by a mob chanting ‘Jai Shri Ram’.
In conversation with PBNS, Ankur Sharma, Brother of killed IB official discredited
report, “I never gave such a statement to Wall Street Journal. This is a ploy to defame my brother and my family. Wall Street Journal is lying.”
These are excerpts from book ‘India’s Rebirth’ that contains his thoughts at various points of time.
“The idea that by encouraging Muslim rowdyism, the present agitation may be put down, is preposterous and those who cherish this notion forget that the bully is neither the strongest nor the bravest of men, and that because the self-restraint of Hindus, miscalled cowardice, has been a prominent feature of his national character, he is absolutely incapable of striking straight and striking hard when any sacred situation demands this.
Not has it been proved recently, that the mild Hindu is so absolutely helpless and incapable of defending his rights and liberties as he is painted by his foreign enemies.”
“Of one thing we may be certain, that Hindu-Mahomedan unity cannot be affected by political adjustments or Congress flatteries. It must be sought deeper down, in the heart and in the mind, for where the causes of disunion are; there the remedies must be sought.”
“Every action for instance which may be objectionable to a number of Mahomedans is now liable to be forbidden because it is likely to lead to a breach of the peace, and one is dimly beginning to wonder whether the day may not come when worship in Hindu temples may be forbidden on that valid ground.”
“(Sri Aurobindo 🙂 I am sorry they are making a fetish of this Hindu-Muslim unity. It is no use ignoring facts; some day the Hindus may have fight the Muslims and they must prepare for it Hindu-Muslim unity should not mean the subjection of the Hindus. Every time the mildness of the Hindu has given way.
The best solution would be to allow the Hindus to organize themselves and the Hindu-Muslim unity would take care of itself, it would automatically solve the problem. Otherwise we are lulled into a false sense of satisfaction that we have solved a difficult problem when in fact we have only shelved it.”
“Take the Hindu-Muslim problem: I don’t know why our politicians accepted Gandhi’s Khilafat agitation. With the mentality of the ordinary Mahomedan it was bound to produce the reaction it has produced: you fed the force, it gathered power and began to make demands which the Hindu mentality had to rise up and reject. That does not require Supermind to find out, it requires common sense. Then, the Mahomedan reality and the Hindu reality began to break heads at Calcutta. (Refers to the riots in Calcutta the previous month).”
June 29, 1926
“If it is India’s destiny to assimilate all the conflicting elements, is it possible to assimilate the Mahomedan element also?
Why not? India has assimilated elements from the Greeks, the Persians and other nations. But she assimilates only when her central truth is recognized by the other party, and even while assimilating she does it in such a way that the elements absorbed are no longer recognizable as foreign but become part of herself. For instance. We took from the Greek architecture, from the Persian painting, etc.
The assimilation of the Mahomedan culture also was done in the mind to a great extent and it would have perhaps gone further. But in order that the process may be complete it is necessary that a change in the Mahomedan mentality should come. The conflict is in the outer life and unless the Mahomedans learn tolerance I do not think the assimilation is possible.
The Hindu is ready to tolerate. He is open to new ideas and his culture has got a wonderful capacity for assimilation, but always provided that India’s central truth is recognized.”
“The attempt to placate the Mahomedans was a false diplomacy. Instead of trying to achieve Hindu-Muslim unity directly, if the Hindus had devoted themselves to national work, the Mahomedans would have gradually come of themselves….
This attempt to patch up a unity has given too much importance to the Muslims and it has been the root of all these troubles.”
“Have you read what Gandhi has said in answer to a correspondent? He says that if eight crores of Muslims demand a separate State, what else are the twenty-five crores of Hindus to do but surrender? Otherwise there will be civil war.
(A disciple:) I hope that is not the type of conciliation he is thinking of.
Not thinking of it, you say? He has actually said that and almost yielded. If you yield to the opposite party beforehand, naturally they will stick strongly to their claims. It means that the minority will rule and the majority must submit. The minority is allowed its say, “We shall be the ruler and you our servants. Our hard [word] will be law; you will have to obey.” This shows a peculiar mind I think this kind of people are a little cracked.”
“In Kashmir, the Hindus had all the monopoly. Now if the Muslim demands are acceded to, the Hindus will be wiped out.”
“Something in him takes delight in suffering for its own sake. Even the prospect of suffering seems to please him… It is the Christian idea that has taken hold of him.
The English are not quite wrong when they say that the Indian must settle their own differences. The Lucknow Pact has become a big political blunder. The Mahomedans, they want to rule India.”
Courtesy : esamskriti