Wikipedia Bio Claimed Slanderous

Wikipedia Bio Claimed Slanderous

Techtree News Staff, Dec 04, 2005 1000 hrs IST

Contributors to Wikipedia are unknown and virtually untraceable and USA's federal law protects online corps from libel lawsuits.

John Seigenthaler, a retired journalist and Robert Kennedy's administrative assistant in the early 1960s is making no bones about how he feels about Wikipedia, the online, free encyclopedia.

Seigenthaler maintains in an editorial on USA Today (of which he is a former page editor) that his biography in Wikipedia wrongly included a paragraph which stated, "For a brief time, he (Seigenthaler) was thought to have been directly involved in the Kennedy assassinations of both John, and his brother, Bobby. Nothing was ever proven." The biography went on to say, "John Seigenthaler moved to the Soviet Union in 1971, and returned to the United States in 1984. He started one of the country's largest public relations firms shortly thereafter."

The same text was found on Reference.com and Answers.com and whose executives maintain that their computers are programmed to copy data as it appears on Wikipedia, and don't check whether it is false or factual.

Seigenthaler goes on to say that at his request executives of the three websites removed the false content about him but don't know, and can't find out, who wrote them.

Contributors to Wikipedia are unknown and virtually untraceable and USA's federal law protects online corporations from libel lawsuits. This means that unlike print and broadcast companies, online service providers cannot be sued for publishing slanderous attacks on citizens posted by others.

Seigenthaler says in his editorial, "One sentence in the biography was true. I was Robert Kennedy's administrative assistant in the early 1960s. I also was his pallbearer."

While on Wikipedia the update has duly been made. It says, "Between May and September of 2005, a biographical article on Seigenthaler carried by Wikipedia contained incorrect statements to the effect that he might have had some involvement in the assassinations of John and Robert F. Kennedy. The comment, added by an anonymous editor, prompted Seigenthaler to write an Op-Ed in USA Today on November 29 2005 saying that "...Wikipedia is a flawed and irresponsible research tool...[f]or four months, Wikipedia depicted me as a suspected assassin."

Discuss this article
( All fields are mandatory )
Comment here
Name
City
E-mail
Word Verification
Type the characters you see in the picture below.
Characters are not case sensetive.



Discussion Board
sam
,bowling green, on Dec 13, 2005 08:38 AM
Who were the other pallbearers?
Pradipta Pal
,Kolkata, on Dec 05, 2005 11:31 AM
I think Wikipedia should remove the <edil> and <contribute> options.Its the illegal work of the contributors and no use slaying wiki.
Mahesh
,mumbai, on Dec 05, 2005 11:36 AM
yep u r saying correct
jam
,chennai, on Dec 05, 2005 02:38 PM
remove 'edit' and 'contribute'??? do u mean to say remove them for anomynous users?
Rakib
,Dhaka, on Dec 05, 2005 12:18 PM
need
Nil
,Mumbai, on Dec 05, 2005 09:35 AM
wiki is a great source of knowledge.I always get correct information here.
Brian
,America, on Dec 04, 2005 09:02 PM
I've just read three different stories on this subject from three online "trusted" news sites, and they were all different! However, none offered any insight into the idea that there may have been enough evidence (at the time) to warrant an investigation into his involvement in the assasinations. He has obviously threatened to sue, thereby silencing any debate on the subject. Kind of seems familiar, makes you think about all the controversy surrounding the Warren Report, and the attempts to silence and discredit all critics the first time around. Witnesses in the JFK assasination mysteriously died. Bottom line, we'll never know because the true findings are kept from the American people, despite the Freedom of Information Act. And so it goes...
Denis
,Ireland., on Dec 04, 2005 08:38 PM
Get over it. I use wiki a lot and find it much better than some of the official sources. Of course it needs to be verified, but with almost a million articles, a few incorrect or even malicious comments are going to get in.

Copyright(C) 2010 UNML. All rights reserved.