Skip to main content

Wikipedia is one of my favorite websites, but with controversial subjects it can be gravely distorted if people aren't vigilant.  Wikipedia is used by millions of people around the globe, and apparently some GOP operatives have decided that they can exploit the millions of viewers for partisan gain by doing a FOX hatchet job on Bill Clinton.  

Notice there is no mention of ANY accomplishments under his presidency, but a litany of every investigation and potential scandal.  Also, one reader counted 42 mentions of Bin Laden. (Contrast with Bush, which has only 2 mentions).

Just take one minute to look at the Discussion Tab, which is where the community discusses what should go into the main article.  You can tell they are mostly GOP by the actual discussions of what should go in the article on Clinton:

Is there some reason his losing his law license isn't mentioned?

Clinton walked out of his commitment to the Army Reserve as a condition to being admitted to ROTC, Clinton signed up and was sworn in to the army reserve, but never showed up. Other than that, his draft dodging looks comarable to Dick Cheney's. Compare the two bios on Wiki.CorvetteZ51 13:07, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

IMHO this is entirely on-target. Clinton deserves all the mentions of Bin Laden he gets. He passed on catching him, allowing 9/11 to happen. I'm not saying Bush doesn't deserve any mentions, as it definitely happened during his tenure. Clinton gets the blame, though. --andrew leahey 21:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I doubt that this is true, but I heard that Clinton sold China the technology that allowed them to create nuclear weapons?

Creation of more than 22.5 million jobs--the most jobs ever created under a single administration, and more than were created in the previous 12 years. Of the total new jobs, 20.7 million, or 92 percent, were in the private sector. Wouldn't one need to factor in 8 years of population growth here?

Wasnt it alleged that one of the sites bombed by America was a pharmaceutical company which produced 50% of sudans drugs and medecines? this should be included, no?

Should someone put his views on homosexuality? He "sed a tear over the death of Matthew Shapard." Then not long after aggresssively disaproevd of gay marriage (to the point of being red in the face).

Compare that with the wikipedia article on George W. Bush.  They are ravenous to put him in a good light:

Is it really necessary, or even appropriate, to update Bush's standing in the polls each week? Seems like overkill. How about simply stating that the polls show an upswing

From time to time, Bush's intellectual capacities have been questioned by the media [101] and other politicians [102], leading to speculation about his IQ, of which no official record is known [103]." This is inflamitory, irrelevent, and factually unsuported (yes, we know that people question his intellegence, but there is nothing indicating that this is true. On the contrary, "Daddy's money" claims aside, the fact that he graduated from Yale speaks of an above average degree of intellegence. Articulation does not equal intellegence

I know some of you would write off that this is wikipedia and people should know better. But the fact is it is an extraordinarily popular website that is accurate on most issues -- communities police millions of articles they are close to and it is widely used because of that reason.  Even the Clinton issues that made the article aren't necessarily untrue, but it is disingenious to only talk about Clinton in terms of scandals when he oversaw the greatest ecomonic prosperity in our entire history.

I urge a small community here from Daily Kos to keep vigilance on sensitive articles that are seen by millions in Wikipedia, such as Bill Clinton.

 It's an easy smear to prevent.  

UPDATE: TO answer a question, you can easily update even if its is locked (Bill Clinton is). You need to be a registered user. If you are new, register and dicker around a bit on some other unlocked articles--then you can update.

Originally posted to SemDem on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:50 AM PST.


Was the Clinton article fair?

11%4 votes
88%31 votes

| 35 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site