The Wikipedia Strategy

When it comes to Wikipedia, you get what you pay for. It is staffed by an army of administrators and editors to ensure that information is presented in a way that supports the company “strategy.”

Ideological bias practiced on a grand scale by various groups within academia and the media has been proven to be quite effective. A historical example from the post-war period is the successful denial of the socialist (i.e., leftist) origins of Adolf Hitler and Nazism, along with a corresponding incorrect labeling of Hitler and his National Socialists as right-wing. Today, a handful of corporate entities also participate in the deliberate spinning of information for ideological gain. One of these is the free internet encyclopedia Wikipedia, which applies ideological (as well as religious) bias on its platform to subtly deceive the public about the reality of important historical persons and events.

Wikipedia

Founded in 2001, Wikipedia identifies itself as a no-cost, multilingual on-line encyclopedia that is written and maintained by a community of volunteer contributors. While on paper, its policy appears fair and democratic, the key point is that Wikipedia has the final word on (and control of) its content. Operationally, an army of administrators and editors ensure that information is presented in a way that supports the company “strategy.” It is irrelevant that almost anyone can contribute to the information that is found on Wikipedia; what matters is Wikipedia’s ability to control the “message.” While the exact motive of Wikipedia’s management is not entirely clear, the deep ideological bias that flows through Wikipedia’s on-line pages speaks for itself.

An Example

While there are many examples of Wikipedia’s left-leaning bias to highlight, the summary description provided by Wikipedia of cult leader and admitted leftist Jim Jones is a good case study and is illustrative of this point. For those who are old enough to remember, Jim Jones was responsible for the “Jonestown Massacre,” the largest mass suicide in recorded history in which over nine hundred persons died, including over three hundred children. The deaths occurred after his followers were forced to drink Flavor-Aid (a powdered beverage product similar to Kool-Aid) laced with cyanide, in an act of what Jones referred to as “revolutionary suicide.” Although Jim Jones’s Marxist/Communist/Socialist origins and his motives are well-established in the historical record—even at times in the mainstream media—those on the left have sought to spin this tragedy as an example of religious fanaticism, as well as an example of the dangers of organized religion. But anyone who is careful to look at the details can see that these claims are wrong.

The historical record is clear that Jones’s ideology was Communism, not Christianity.

A Well-Planned Strategy

Here is how the well-planned and carefully crafted strategy is (subtly) employed on Wikipedia:

1. Start with an important person or historical incident that the Left finds inconvenient or unflattering (in this case, Jim Jones, the architect of the 1978 Jonestown Massacre).

2. In the summary first paragraph, ignore any mention of direct or indirect connections to the Left, such as Marxism, Communism and/or Socialism.

3. At the same time, also in the summary, seek to provide or imply an alternative explanation to the person or event (i.e., create a “straw man” set of facts). To be successful, it is important that the explanation contain at least an element of truth. It is often effective to make use of a single word that is not clearly defined. If possible, attempt to attribute the person to—or place blame for an incident/event on—the opposing side.

4. Include at least some of the correct facts in various places throughout the body of the entry, so that when anyone questions the summary, it can be pointed out that the entry contains accurate information.

5. Because most (or at least many) people will only read the summary first paragraph of a Wikipedia entry, the various facts contained in the details will never be seen by most readers. Due to the platforms careful/strategic selection of wording and language for the summary, many individuals will move forward under a mistaken impression of the facts.

In the entry on Wikipedia for Jim Jones you will find that the summary paragraph describes him as three things: 1) a cult leader; 2) a preacher; and 3) a mass murderer (in that order). You will also notice that the summary contains absolutely no mention of the fact that Jones was a promoter of Marxism/Communism/Socialism. While two of the three the labels, “cult leader” and “mass murderer,” are fair and accurate in this particular case, it is the use of the undefined word “preacher” that supports Wikipedia’s desired deception by giving the impression that Jim Jones was a religious person/religious leader. Admittedly, there is (only) a small sliver of truth to Jones being a “preacher” in the standard (i.e., religious) use of this word, as he did claim to be a religious preacher and made use of religious language, although Christianity was not—by his own admission—what inspired him. Contrary to what the summary information implies, Jones was anti-religious, anti-church, and anti-Bible. He did pretend to be a preacher of religion, in the same way that actors pretend to be certain things in movies and on television (or in the same way that some politicians pretend to hold their faith in high regard by referring to themselves as “devout”) but as we all know, pretending to be a doctor or lawyer on television (or otherwise) does not make you one. Conveniently, Wikipedia does not acknowledge this distinction and instead chooses to apply the generic label of “preacher” in its summary description of Jones.

The Jim Jones Summary - Step 1

As described above, in the first element of the deception strategy the initial Wikipedia summary paragraph entry for Jim Jones takes pains to avoid any mention of Marxism, Communism, or Socialism. This is despite the following facts, which can be found randomly sprinkled throughout the body of the Wikipedia entry and supported by the corresponding footnotes which are included in the entry:

Jones was an avowed Marxist since his college days (around the age of eighteen) (notes 21 and 42).

His idol was the Communist leader Mao Tse-tung (note 26), he described Lenin and Stalin as his heroes, saw the Soviet Union as an “ideal society” (notes 166 and 167), and referred to the Soviet Union as his “spiritual motherland” (note 208).

Although he originally concealed his communism to his followers, he began to gradually introduce his true beliefs to them at some point in the late 1960s (notes 118, 119, and 120).

He promoted a form of anti-capitalism which he called “Apostolic Socialism” (note 118), and claimed to be constructing a “socialist paradise” at Jonestown (note 173).

He boasted of Jonestown being “the purest Communists” (note 174), and that his intent was to establish a perfect communist society there (notes 75 and 127).

Amazingly, Jones may have actually been too-Communist (or at least too extreme) for the former Soviet Union, as the USSR took steps to publicly distance itself from him (note 249).

The Jim Jones Summary - Step 2

In the second aspect of the strategy, which involves attempting to associate Jones the man with something other than Leftist ideology, the summary first paragraph on Wikipedia describes him as a “preacher”—which most will read as and assume to represent a religious/Christian preacher—despite the following information that is contained in the body of the Wikipedia entry (and supported by the corresponding footnotes):

Jones admitted to being an atheist well before the massacre (note 130) and is on record as having pressed his wife to accept atheism (notes 46, 47 and 130).

He said that putting “real socialism into practice” was his main reason for becoming a minister (note 53) and claimed that infiltrating the church was done to promote his Marxism (notes 50 and 51). According to his wife, he merely masqueraded as a church leader in order to mobilize people via religion to promote his Marxist beliefs (note 130).

Making use of typical Marxist language, Jones taught that “those who remained drugged with the opiate of religion had to be brought to enlightenment,” which he defined as socialism (note 121).

He rejected the Bible as a tool to oppress women and non-whites (note 122) and referred to it as a paper idol he must destroy (note 111).

Given all of the above, and its inclusion (although sporadic) at places within the main body of the Wikipedia entry on Jim Jones, it is definitely odd (and quite telling) that the summary paragraph for the Jones entry makes no mention of Marxism, Communism, or Socialism, while at the same time labels him as a preacher.

But Why?

So why the contrived effort to avoid mentioning Jones’s Leftist background and beliefs? The simple answer is that if Jim Jones is associated with these ideas, it then makes it difficult to market and sell Leftist ideology to the masses (similar to how knowledge of Adolf Hitler as being a card-carrying and self-labeled socialist makes it difficult to sell socialist ideology to the masses). And why also imply that Jim Jones was a religious/Christian preacher, even though it is clear that he was not? The simple answer is that religion, God, and the church are the enemies of Marxism, Communism and Socialism, so it is optimal for Leftists to blame Jones’s ideology and horrific actions on God, organized religion, and the holy church.

But why then allow the placement of the correct facts and links to accurate information in the body of the Wikipedia entry? Does that make any sense? The answer here is also a simple one. Most people do not read the details and only look to summary information. Thus, including the correct facts (in various different places throughout the lengthy entry) allows Wikipedia to claim that their information is accurate, which then allows them to label any of their critics as paranoid or delusional for suggesting that the entry is inaccurate or in any way deceptive.

(If use of the word “preacher” is necessary, it should be made clear in the summary first paragraph that Jim Jones merely pretended to be a religious preacher. Alternatively, it could be clarified that as a preacher, what Jones actually preached was Marxism/ Communism/Socialism. Otherwise, the Wikipedia entry could simply identify him as exactly what he was; a Leftist. In fact, there are many options that would produce an accurate summary paragraph—if accuracy is what Wikipedia intended.)

How to Respond

The historical record clearly shows that Jim Jones was a not: 1) a religious preacher; 2) a follower of the teachings of Jesus and/or the Bible; nor, 3) even a remotely religious person. Wikipedia knows that, and the proof is found in the main body section of their own entry for Jim Jones. Jones was only a “preacher” in one limited sense of the word; he was a preacher of a unique brand of Marxism/Communism/Socialism. Regardless of the truth, the strategy routinely employed by Wikipedia of using deceptive summary information works (and continues to work) because people tend to avoid the details.

To confront this subtle form of deception, it is important to remain informed. Going forward, if you make use of Wikipedia for general information, be particularly skeptical of the information found in the summary paragraph. Specifically, make sure to be on the lookout for undefined generic terms that are used within the summary information. Ask questions, study the details, and finally, when you are done, share your conclusions with others.

Photo Credit- Wiki Commons (editing by Everyman staff)