- Chelsea Handler tackles system racism in ‘Hello Privilege. It’s Me, Chelsea’ 6 Years Ago
- Gun control proposal: Trump, lawmakers considering background check-conducting app 6 Years Ago
- How to stream Browns vs. Jets on Monday Night Football Today 7:00 AM
- What are anons? Today 6:30 AM
- How to stream Eagles vs. Falcons on Sunday Night Football Today 6:00 AM
- How to stream ‘Power’ season 6, episode 4 Today 5:00 AM
- How to stream WWE’s Clash of Champions 2019 Saturday 8:00 PM
- How ‘F*ck off Scotland’ became a Scottish rallying cry amid Brexit madness Saturday 6:28 PM
- A Missouri officer resigned after his Islamophobic Facebook posts surfaced Saturday 5:08 PM
- Adding ‘Triggered’ to stock photos of white men creates Netflix comedy special thumbnails Saturday 3:10 PM
- New restaurant in New York has a seriously unfortunate name: ‘Qanoon’ Saturday 1:38 PM
- These are the 10 best ‘Star Wars’ ships Saturday 12:41 PM
- Google Maps helped solve a decades-old missing persons case Saturday 12:27 PM
- Teen who plotted deadly swatting prank over Call of Duty argument gets prison time Saturday 11:58 AM
- RIP to the real star of ‘Stranger Things’: Steve Harrington’s mullet Saturday 11:04 AM
Wikipedians put Wikipedia ahead of political parties
Unlike every other place on the planet, Wikipedia is not a cesspool of partisan bickering.
On the Internet, political ideologues live within echo chambers of their own making. Conservative blogs link to other conservative blogs, liberal blogs link to other liberal blogs. Reddit’s r/ronpaul upvotes libertarian opinions, and punishes socialists who poke their heads in with a storm of downvotes. But there’s at least one place on the Internet that doesn’t deteriorate into ideological, warring fiefdoms.
On Wikipedia, users aren’t afraid to talk to their political enemies. And perhaps most intriguingly, according to a new study, they care as much about being “Wikipedian” as they do about being a Republican or a Democrat.
Welcome to the nation state of Wikipedia.
The study, published by a team of researchers from the University of Southern California and Barcelona Media, looked at the behavior patterns of self-identified Republican or Democratic Wikipedia users. There’s a box you can show on your public user page that will advertise your party allegiance. Wikipedians who reveal their political leanings are a lot more likely to edit articles on politics, the researchers found. But when they discuss those articles they don’t shy away from ideological opponents. In other words, unlike everywhere else on the Internet, they don’t seek out people they agree with and shun people they disagree with. Instead, both sides are highly engaged in the debate.
There’s also a box you can check that will publicly identify you as a “Wikipedian.” Perhaps predictably, a lot more users check that box than any party affiliation box.
“The results indicate that the social identities of being a member of a political party and of being a Wikipedian may be equally important,” the researchers concluded.
“The results of our analysis show that despite the increasing political division of the US, there are still areas in which political dialogue is possible and happens.”
That conclusion actually correlates with another recent story. Earlier this year, researches examined more than Wikipedia 70,000 articles using an analytical technique intended to discover bias in newspaper articles. They discovered that Wikipedia articles have become less and less biased over time. Whereas the encyclopedia once leaned Democratic, it now leans neutral. The researchers concluded that’s because the userbase has become a lot more diverse than it was in the early days. But maybe its also because conservative and liberal Wikipedians aren’t afraid of actually talking to each other.
Kevin Morris is a veteran web reporter and editor who specializes in longform journalism. He led the Daily Dot’s esports vertical and, following its acquisition by GAMURS in late 2016, launched Dot Esports, where he serves as the site’s editor-in-chief.