Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident

Last updated

John Seigenthaler in October 2005 John Seigenthaler Sr. speaking.jpg
John Seigenthaler in October 2005

In May 2005, an unregistered editor posted a hoax article onto Wikipedia about journalist John Seigenthaler. [1] The article falsely stated that Seigenthaler had been a suspect in the assassinations of U.S. President John F. Kennedy and U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy.

Contents

After the hoax was discovered and corrected later in September, Seigenthaler, a friend and aide to Robert Kennedy, wrote in USA Today describing the article as an "Internet character assassination". [2]

The incident raised questions about the reliability of Wikipedia and other websites with user-generated content that lack the legal accountability of traditional newspapers and published materials. [3] In a December 13, 2005, interview, [4] co-founder Jimmy Wales expressed his support for Wikipedia policy allowing articles to be edited by unregistered users, but announced plans to roll back their article creation privileges as part of a vandalism-control strategy. [4] The incident ultimately led Wikipedia to introduce stricter referencing requirements for biographies of living persons.

Hoax

On May 26, 2005, a biographical article about John Seigenthaler was created by an anonymous Wikipedia editor that contained, in its entirety, the following text: [5]

John Seigenthaler was the assistant to Attorney General Robert Kennedy in the ealry[ sic ]1960's.[ sic ] For a brief time, he was thought to have been directly involved in the Kennedy assasinations[ sic ] of both John, and his brother, Bobby. Nothing was ever proven.

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 firm[ sic ] shortly thereafter.

Detection and correction

In September, Victor S. Johnson Jr., a friend of Seigenthaler's, discovered the article. [6] After Johnson alerted him to the article, Seigenthaler emailed his friends and colleagues about it. On September 23, 2005, colleague Eric Newton copied Seigenthaler's official biography from the Freedom Forum website into Wikipedia. The following day, this biography was removed by a Wikipedia editor due to copyright violation and was replaced with a short original biography. [7] Newton informed Seigenthaler of his action when he ran into Seigenthaler in November in New York at the Committee to Protect Journalists dinner.

In October 2005, Seigenthaler contacted the Chair of the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation, Jimmy Wales, who hid affected versions of the article history from public view in the Wikipedia version logs, in effect removing them from all but Wikipedia administrators' view. [8] Some mirror websites not controlled by Wikipedia continued to display the older and inaccurate article for several weeks until the new version of the article was propagated to these other websites. [9] In 2013, the hoax article was archived to Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia.

Anonymous editor identified

On November 29, 2005, Seigenthaler described the incident in an op-ed in USA Today , of which he had been the founding editorial director. In the article, he included a verbatim reposting of the false statements and called Wikipedia a "flawed and irresponsible research tool". [2]

An expanded version was published several days later in The Tennessean , a daily newspaper in Nashville, Tennessee, where Seigenthaler had served in various capacities from beat reporter to chairman. In the article, Seigenthaler detailed his failed attempts to identify the anonymous person who posted the inaccurate biography. He reported that he had asked the poster's Internet service provider, BellSouth, to identify its user from the user's IP address. BellSouth refused to identify the user without a court order, suggesting that Seigenthaler file a John Doe lawsuit against the user, which Seigenthaler declined to do. [10]

Daniel Brandt, a San Antonio activist who had started the website Wikipedia Watch to provide scrutiny of Wikipedia content in response to his objections to the article about him, looked up the IP address in Seigenthaler's article. He found that it related to Rush Delivery, a delivery service company in Nashville. He contacted Seigenthaler and the media and posted this information on his website. [11]

On December 9, Brian Chase, an operations manager of Rush Delivery, admitted that he had posted the false biography because he believed Wikipedia to be "some sort of joke website". After confessing, Chase was fired from Rush Delivery. [12] [13] He presented a letter of apology to Seigenthaler, [14] who successfully interceded with Rush Delivery to reinstate Chase. [12] Seigenthaler confirmed that he would not file a lawsuit in relation to the incident. He said that he was concerned that "every biography on Wikipedia is going to be hit by this stuff—think what they'd do to Tom DeLay and Hillary Clinton, to mention two. My fear is that we're going to get government regulation of the Internet as a result." [15]

Reactions

Seigenthaler's public reaction

In his November 29, 2005, USA Today editorial, Seigenthaler criticized Congress for Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects ISPs and web sites from being held legally responsible for content posted by their customers and users: [2]

Federal law also protects online corporations – BellSouth, AOL, MCI, Wikipedia, etc. – from libel lawsuits. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, passed in 1996, specifically states that "no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker." That legalese means that, unlike print and broadcast companies, online service providers cannot be sued for defaming attacks on citizens posted by others. And so we live in a universe of new media with phenomenal opportunities for worldwide communications and research – but populated by volunteer vandals with poison-pen intellects. Congress has enabled them and protects them.

On December 5, 2005, Seigenthaler and Wales appeared jointly on CNN to discuss the matter. On December 6, 2005, the two were interviewed on National Public Radio's Talk of the Nation radio program. Wales described a new policy that he had implemented in order to prevent unregistered users from creating new articles on the English-language Wikipedia, though their ability to edit existing articles was retained.

In the CNN interview, Seigenthaler also raised the spectre of increased government regulation of the Web:

Can I just say where I'm worried about this leading. Next year we go into an election year. Every politician is going to find himself or herself subjected to the same sort of outrageous commentary that hit me, and hits others. I'm afraid we're going to get regulated media as a result of that. And I tell you, I think if you can't fix it, both fix the history as well as the biography pages, I think it's going to be in real trouble, and we're going to have to be fighting to keep the government from regulating you.

In the December 6 joint NPR interview, Seigenthaler said that he did not want to have anything to do with Wikipedia because he disapproved of its basic assumptions. In an article Seigenthaler wrote for USA Today in late 2005, he said, "I am interested in letting many people know that Wikipedia is a flawed and irresponsible research tool." [2] He also pointed out that the false information had been online for over four months before he was aware of it, and that he had not been able to edit the article to correct it. After speaking with Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, Seigenthaler said: "My 'biography' was posted May 26. On May 29, one of Wales' volunteers 'edited' it only by correcting the misspelling of the word 'early.' For four months, Wikipedia depicted me as a suspected assassin before I erased it from the website's history Oct. 5. The falsehoods remained on Answers.com and Reference.com for three more weeks." [2] Editing Wikipedia, he suggested, would lend it his sanction or approval, and he stated his belief that editing the article was not enough and instead he wanted to expose "incurable flaws" in the Wikipedia process and ethos.

On December 9, Seigenthaler appeared on C-SPAN's Washington Journal with Brian Lamb hosting. He said he was concerned that other pranksters would try to spoof members of Congress or other powerful figures in government, which may then prompt a backlash and turn back First Amendment rights on the Web.

In the June 2007 issue of Reason magazine, Seigenthaler also expressed concern about the lack of transparency underlined by Wales' removal of the hoax pages from the article's history page. He also stated that many of the comments left by users in the edit summaries were things he would not want his nine-year-old grandson to see. [16]

Wikimedia Foundation reaction

In an interview with BusinessWeek on December 13, 2005, Wales discussed the reasons the hoax had gone undetected, and steps being taken to address them. [4] He stated that one problem was that Wikipedia's use had grown faster than its self-monitoring system could comfortably handle, and that therefore new page creation would be restricted to account holders, addressing one of Seigenthaler's main criticisms.

He also gave his opinion that encyclopedias as a whole (whether print or online) were not usually appropriate for primary sources and should not be relied upon as authoritative (as some were doing), but that nonetheless Wikipedia was more reliable as "background reading" on subjects than most online sources. He stated that Wikipedia was a "work in progress". [4]

A variety of changes were also made to Wikipedia's software and working practices, to address some of the issues arising. A new policy, 'biographies of living persons', was created on December 17, 2005; editorial restrictions, including reference requirements, were introduced on the creation of new Wikipedia articles; and new tracking categories for the biographies of living people were implemented. [17]

The Foundation added a new level of "oversight" features to the MediaWiki software, [18] accessible as of May 16, 2012, to around 37 experienced editors and Wikimedia staff members nominated by either Wales or the Arbitration Committee. This originally allowed for specific historical versions to be hidden from everyone (including Oversight editors), which then become unable to be viewed by anyone except developers via manual intervention, though the feature was later changed so that other Oversighters could view these revisions to monitor the tool's use. Currently such procedures are standardized by the 'Office actions' policy which states: "Sometimes the Wikimedia Foundation has to delete, protect or blank a page without going through the normal site/community process(es). These edits are temporary measures to prevent legal trouble or personal harm and should not be undone by any user." [19]

Other reactions

In reaction to the controversy, The New York Times business editor Larry Ingrassia sent a memo to his staff commenting on the reliability of Wikipedia and writing, "We shouldn't be using it to check any information that goes into the newspaper." [20] Several other publications commented on the incident, often criticizing Wikipedia and its open editing model as unreliable, citing the Seigenthaler incident as evidence.

The scientific journal Nature conducted a study comparing the accuracy of Wikipedia and the Encyclopædia Britannica in 42 hard sciences–related articles in December 2005. The Wikipedia articles studied were found to contain four serious errors and 162 factual errors, omissions or misleading statements, while the Encyclopædia Britannica also contained four serious errors and 123 factual errors, omissions or misleading statements. Referring to the Seigenthaler incident and several other controversies, the authors wrote that the study "suggests that such high-profile examples are the exception rather than the rule." [21]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of Wikipedia</span>

Wikipedia, a free-content online encyclopedia written and maintained by a community of volunteers known as Wikipedians, began with its first edit on 15 January 2001, two days after the domain was registered. It grew out of Nupedia, a more structured free encyclopedia, as a way to allow easier and faster drafting of articles and translations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jimmy Wales</span> Co-founder of Wikipedia (born 1966)

Jimmy Donal Wales, also known as Jimbo Wales, is an American Internet entrepreneur, webmaster, and former financial trader. He is a co-founder of the non-profit free encyclopedia, Wikipedia, and the for-profit wiki hosting service Fandom. He has worked on other online projects, including Bomis, Nupedia, WikiTribune, and WT Social.

Some edits to the online encyclopedia Wikipedia by staff of the United States Congress have created controversy, notably in early to mid-2006. Several such instances, such as those involving Marty Meehan, Norm Coleman, Conrad Burns, and Joe Biden, received significant media attention. Others, such as those involving Gil Gutknecht, were reported but received less widespread coverage.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criticism of Wikipedia</span> Controversy surrounding the online encyclopedia Wikipedia

The free online encyclopedia Wikipedia has been criticized since its creation in 2001. Most of the criticism has been directed toward its content, community of established volunteer users, process, and rules. Critics have questioned its factual reliability, the readability and organization of its articles, the lack of methodical fact-checking, and its political bias. Concerns have also been raised about systemic bias along gender, racial, political, corporate, institutional, and national lines. Conflicts of interest arising from corporate campaigns to influence content have also been highlighted. Further concerns include the vandalism and partisanship facilitated by anonymous editing, clique behavior, social stratification between a guardian class and newer users, excessive rule-making, edit warring, and uneven policy application.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Reliability of Wikipedia</span>

The reliability of Wikipedia and its user-generated editing model, particularly its English-language edition, has been questioned and tested. Wikipedia is written and edited by volunteer editors, who generate online content with the editorial oversight of other volunteer editors via community-generated policies and guidelines. The reliability of the project has been tested statistically through comparative review, analysis of the historical patterns, and strengths and weaknesses inherent in its editing process. The online encyclopedia has been criticized for its factual unreliability, principally regarding its content, presentation, and editorial processes. Studies and surveys attempting to gauge the reliability of Wikipedia have mixed results. Wikipedia's reliability was frequently criticized in the 2000s but has been improved; its English-language edition has been generally praised in the late 2010s and early 2020s.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Daniel Terdiman</span> American journalist

Daniel Terdiman is an American journalist, who has been published in both print and non-print media, including Time, The New York Times, Wired, CNET, Martha Stewart Weddings, Salon.com, Business 2.0, VentureBeat and the San Francisco Chronicle. He writes about a wide range of subjects from hi-tech to the web to sports.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Essjay controversy</span> Controversy over a Wikipedia user and Wikia employees identity

The Essjay controversy was an incident in which Ryan Jordan, a Wikipedia editor who went by the username "Essjay", falsely presented himself as a university professor of religion from 2005 to 2007, during which time he was elected to top positions of trust by the community, including administrator and arbitrator. In July 2006, The New Yorker published an article about "Essjay", and mentioned that he was a university professor of religion. The New Yorker later acknowledged that they did not know his real name.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">WikiScanner</span> Defunct database linking Wikipedia edits to institutions

WikiScanner was a publicly searchable database that linked anonymous edits on Wikipedia to the organizations where those edits apparently originated. It did this by cross-referencing the edits with data on the owners of the associated block of IP addresses, though it did not investigate edits made under a username. It was created by Virgil Griffith and released on August 13, 2007.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Larry Sanger</span> American Internet project developer and Wikipedia co-founder

Lawrence Mark Sanger is an American Internet project developer and philosopher who co-founded Wikipedia along with Jimmy Wales. Sanger coined Wikipedia's name, and provided initial drafts for many of its early guidelines, including the "Neutral point of view" and "Ignore all rules" policies. Prior to Wikipedia, he was the editor-in-chief of Nupedia, another online encyclopedia. He later worked on other encyclopedic projects, including Encyclopedia of Earth, Citizendium, and Everipedia, and advised the nonprofit American political encyclopedia Ballotpedia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John Seigenthaler</span> American journalist, writer, and political figure (1927–2014)

John Lawrence Seigenthaler was an American journalist, writer, and political figure. He was known as a prominent defender of First Amendment rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Vandalism on Wikipedia</span> Malicious editing of Wikipedia

On Wikipedia, vandalism is editing the project in an intentionally disruptive or malicious manner. Vandalism includes any addition, removal, or modification that is intentionally humorous, nonsensical, a hoax, offensive, libelous or degrading in any way.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wikipedia community</span> Volunteers who create and maintain Wikipedia

The Wikipedia community, collectively and individually known as Wikipedians, is an online community of volunteers who create and maintain Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia. Since August 2012, the word "Wikipedian" has been an Oxford Dictionary entry. Wikipedians may or may not consider themselves part of the Wikimedia movement, a global network of volunteer contributors to Wikipedia and other related projects hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Outline of Wikipedia</span> Overview and topical guide to the free online crowdsourced encyclopedia

The following outline is provided as an overview of and a topical guide to Wikipedia:

The Wikimedia Foundation has been involved in several lawsuits, generally regarding the content of Wikipedia. They have won some and lost others.

Conflict-of-interest (COI) editing on Wikipedia occurs when editors use Wikipedia to advance the interests of their external roles or relationships. The type of COI editing that compromises Wikipedia the most is paid editing for public relations (PR) purposes. Several policies and guidelines exist to combat conflict of interest editing, including Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline and the Wikimedia Foundation's paid-contribution disclosure policy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wikipediocracy</span> Website for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia

Wikipediocracy is a website for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia. Its members have brought information about Wikipedia's controversies to the attention of the media. The site was founded in March 2012 by users of Wikipedia Review, another site dedicated to criticism of Wikipedia.

<i>Talking Angela</i> Chatterbot app created by Outfit7

Talking Angela is a videogame app, developed by Slovenian studio Outfit7 as part of the Talking Tom & Friends series. It was released on November 13, 2012 and December 2012 for iPhone, iPod and iPad, January 2013 for Android, and January 2014 for Google Play. The app's successor, the My Talking Angela app, was released in December 2014.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jar'Edo Wens hoax</span> Hoax Wikipedia article which existed for almost 10 years

Jar'Edo Wens was a deliberately fictitious Wikipedia article which existed for almost 10 years before being spotted in November 2014 and deleted in March 2015. At the time, it was the longest-lasting hoax article discovered in the history of Wikipedia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Alan MacMasters hoax</span> Hoax about the inventor of the toaster

In February 2012, a group of British students edited the English Wikipedia article about electric toasters and inserted the false claim that a man named Alan MacMasters invented the toaster in 1893. One of the friends created a separate article about the fictitious Alan MacMasters in February 2013 and embellished it further in the following years. The fake article was cited by newspapers and other organizations until the hoax was exposed in July 2022.

References

Notes

  1. ↑ Cohen, Noam (August 24, 2009). "Wikipedia to Limit Changes to Articles on People". The New York Times . Archived from the original on November 3, 2012. Retrieved April 7, 2012.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 Seigenthaler, John (November 29, 2005). "A false Wikipedia 'biography'". USA Today . Archived from the original on November 28, 2012. Retrieved October 27, 2013.
  3. ↑ "The State of the News Media 2006". The Project for Excellence in Journalism. September 14, 2009. Archived from the original on March 22, 2016.
  4. 1 2 3 4 Helm, Burt (December 13, 2005). "Wikipedia: "A Work in Progress"". BusinessWeek Online. Bloomberg Businessweek. Archived from the original on April 11, 2015. Retrieved October 16, 2013.
  5. ↑ "First edit to Seigenthaler's biography page". Wikipedia. May 26, 2005. Archived from the original on October 9, 2022. Retrieved August 24, 2022.
  6. ↑ Carney, John I. (February 13, 2006). "Seigenthaler battles online encyclopedia". Shelbyville Times-Gazette. Archived from the original on October 6, 2014. Retrieved September 30, 2014.
  7. ↑ Archived version Archived June 9, 2022, at the Wayback Machine of the rewriting of the official biography.
  8. ↑ Two deletion log entries Archived November 22, 2021, at the Wayback Machine of the article.
  9. ↑ Dalby, Andrew (2009). The World and Wikipedia: How we are editing reality. Somerset: Siduri. p.  59. ISBN   978-0-9562052-0-9.
  10. ↑ Terdiman, Daniel. "Is Wikipedia safe from libel liability?". CNET. Archived from the original on January 23, 2021. Retrieved January 25, 2021.
  11. ↑ Terdiman, Daniel (December 15, 2005). "In search of the Wikipedia prankster". CNET. Archived from the original on March 8, 2023. Retrieved July 3, 2014.
  12. 1 2 Buchanan, Brian J. (November 17, 2006). "Founder shares cautionary tale of libel in cyberspace". First Amendment Center. Archived from the original on February 12, 2007. Retrieved October 4, 2011.
  13. ↑ "The wiki principle" . The Economist . April 22, 2006. ISSN   0013-0613. Archived from the original on November 22, 2021. Retrieved November 22, 2021.
  14. ↑ "Man who posted false Wikipedia bio apologizes to Seigenthaler". First Amendment Center . June 4, 2007. Archived from the original on June 4, 2007. Retrieved July 12, 2022.
  15. ↑ Page, Susan (December 11, 2005). "Author apologizes for fake Wikipedia biography". USA Today . Archived from the original on December 28, 2011. Retrieved October 27, 2013.
  16. ↑ Mangu-Ward, Katherine (June 2007). "Wikipedia and Beyond: Jimmy Wales' sprawling vision". Reason Magazine: 20–29. Archived from the original on July 19, 2018. Retrieved March 8, 2016.
  17. ↑ "Wikipedia and Seigenthaler; Restricted editing". Wikipedia Signpost. December 5, 2005. Archived from the original on June 16, 2022. Retrieved November 23, 2021.
  18. ↑ Ral315 (June 5, 2006). "New revision-hiding feature added". Wikipedia Signpost. Archived from the original on January 30, 2016. Retrieved February 23, 2015.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  19. ↑ "Office actions". Wikipedia . Wikimedia Foundation. Archived from the original on November 20, 2021. Retrieved November 23, 2021.
  20. ↑ "The New York Times Business editor Larry Ingrassia's memo "Wiki-whatdia?"". December 7, 2005. Archived from the original on March 8, 2006.
  21. ↑ Giles, Jim (December 15, 2005). "Special Report: Internet encyclopaedias go head to head". Nature. 438 (7070): 900–901. Bibcode:2005Natur.438..900G. doi: 10.1038/438900a . PMID   16355180.

Other sources

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.