Thursday, July 29, 2010

Make That Ten

Ottawa — Defence Department computers in Ottawa have been used to alter information on a Wikipedia page critical of the Conservative government’s decision to spend billions on a new stealth fighter.

Nine attempts have been made to change the online encyclopedia’s entry on the Joint Strike Fighter, including the removal of any information critical of the Harper government’s plan to spend at least $16-billion on the new aircraft.


And from the wiki page:

It is worth noting that the vandalism has continued today since the article was unlocked, but this time the IP address is from Calgary. I think this story may grow over time as the Prentice story did.

The "Prentice Story" is this, if you've forgotten. I think the Calgary IP they're referencing is 70.79.166.251.

17 comments:

Lenny said...

You need to fix that first link.

Scott Tribe said...

Perhaps some of our 'colleagues' on Calgary have decided to try and lend the Defence dept folks a helping hand, on being made aware of this story.

If the IP comes from another government server though, and this continues, you start to wonder if it's more then just some random Conservative supporting employees getting out of hand.

bigcitylib said...

Fixed

Tof KW said...

Anyone else see the obvious Orwellian comparisons here as our very own Ministry of Truth attempts to alter reality in real time?

Next step is for opponents to start disappearing with their past histories erased.

R. G. Harvie said...

@TofKW - Anyone else see the obvious Orwellian comparisons here as our very own Ministry of Truth attempts to alter reality in real time.

The stupid thing is anyone who takes Wikipedia as unvarnished truth in matters of politics is delusional.

While it MAY contain some factual references, it is so replete with personal biases of those who contribute to it that to either EXPECT it to be unbiased, or to be OFFENDED when someone tries to color their version of truth is to be more than a little naive.

Much.
Ado.
About.
Nothing.

Jerome Bastien said...

Im not sure how "information" can be "critical" of the Harper government.

Information is by nature neutral. Perhaps this is just badly phrased - information can be "damaging" or something like that, but information itself doesnt criticize.

Also, its just part of doing business now to check wikipedia entries for a large org. Cliche references to Orwell and 1984 are really lame.

For example, recently my buddy works at immigration sent me a link to Jason Kenney's wikipedia page. The first line was

"Jason Kenney is the current Minister of Citizenship of Immigration and a giant douchebag."

This has been fixed since then.

Also, wikipedia, while extremely useful for non-controversial topic, shouldnt be a forum for discontent partisans to voice their displeasure at anything. Get a freaking blog!

crf said...

T of KW,

I don't think it's Orwellian. It is more patheticly juvenile than that. More like a 10 year old kid trying to doctor a bad report card so his parents don't get upset.

Lenny said...

Shorter Harvie,

Wikipedia is unreliable because folks like the Conservative government manipulate it, therefore there's no reason care when folks like the Conservative government manipulate it.

Paul S said...

This is as exciting as the 91,000 documents released by WikiLeaks.

Shiner said...

Do you CPC dittoheads even bother to read stories anymore? I'm not being critical, I think it's great that you're all saving time by going straight past the facts and straight to the bullshit.

From the article:

Defence Department computers were also used to insert insults, aimed at Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff, into the Wikipedia Joint Strike Fighter page. Ignatieff has questioned the proposed purchase.

Quotes from news articles outlining opposition to the arms sale by University of British Columbia professor Michael Byers, a former NDP candidate, were also removed.


Also, Lenny, shorter every Rob:
If it reflects badly on the government it's not worth talking about.

R. G. Harvie said...

Really.

So, every time there is a complaint or concern raised by a politician relative to some aspect in Wikipedia it becomes a "fact"?

How about this - let's leave the Wiki entry alone, and just add, to complete the "facts":

"The Media have criticized the conduct of Michael Ignatieff and his Defence Critic, Ujjal Dosanjh for threatening to set aside the contract, referencing past errors of the Liberal government under Jean Chretien in cancelling an existing contract to replace the aging Sea King Helicopter fleet that ultimate cost Canadian taxpayers $500 million and resulted in delays such that 20 years later, the fleet has still not been replaced [http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/f-35-fighters-are-the-price-of-sovereignty/article1643207/]

Media has suggested that the Liberal party critique evidences a willingness for the Liberal party to "make the same political mistakes over and over again". [http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/politics/Remember+Kings/3289032/story.html]

One might also add that the decision to buy the aircraft means Canadians can compete for contracts worth billions of dollars of work for the projected 3,000 F-35s to be built for the participating countries -- about two-thirds for the U.S. military, said Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose. Canada, as a partner with eight other countries under the U.S.-led partnership in the program, had already invested $168 million into the choice and development of fighters among competing designs. Industry Minister Tony Clement said 85 Canadian companies, research laboratories and universities have already done $350-million worth of contracts for development of the fighter.[http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Canada+spend+billion+fighter+jets/3290774/story.html]

Or.. would it be fair to comment:

Shorter Shiner and Lenny - if it fairly discloses the relevant facts, including past Liberal stupidity, "it's not worth talking about."

Gene Rayburn said...

Hmm... the first two articles of "proof" are editorials and the link to the third doesn't work. That's a pretty weak defense Rob.

You can do better!

Gene Rayburn said...

Rob, if you need some words of guidance here's a chestnut from Fred From BC

""PROOF is what people will base their decision on, and you simply have none."

Fred From BC

Of course, unlike Fred you've been known to attempt prove your arguments. The only proof Fred knows is on the label of his bottle.

Shiner said...

Ah, another goldie from the Rob songbook, bbbbbbut the Liiiiberals. Weak, especially when it has nothing to do with the actual substance of the issue. Jeebus, why didn't you just start talking about adscam Rob?

Lenny said...

Shorter Rob:

The Liberals. Therefore, it's ok that the Conservative government is editing Wiki pages in it's favour.

Dman said...

Sanctimonious Steve & his wrecking crew cronies cannot point to a single piece of substantive legislation in almost 5 years ... this speaks volumes about their genuine BullShit artistry ... bunch of third string pretenders ... when it comes to stating the obvious, they are nothing more than one trick ponies !!!

Paul S said...

Steve & his wrecking crew cronies cannot point to a single piece of substantive legislation in almost 5 years -Dman

Steve points to the strongest economy in the G20 with the highest employment rate and highest rate of home ownership anywhere.