Jump to content

Racial bias on Wikipedia: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎top: This is from an opinion column, not a news article, and should be attributed to the author of the column, not Slate as a whole. Not sure if this is leadworthy either.
Nuking the article and starting over. Hopefully this will suffice for now
Line 4: Line 4:
<!-- End of AfD message, feel free to edit beyond this point -->
<!-- End of AfD message, feel free to edit beyond this point -->


{{essay-like|date=April 2015}}
{{synthesis|date=April 2015}}
{{Commons category|Racism}}
{{Discrimination sidebar}}
{{Discrimination sidebar}}
Wikipedia has been criticized for having a systematic racial bias in its coverage, due to an under-representation of [[people of colour]] within its editor base. <ref name=philly>{{cite web|last1=Melamed|first1=Samantha|title=Edit-athon aims to put left-out black artists into Wikipedia|url=http://articles.philly.com/2015-03-26/entertainment/60480419_1_new-artists-american-art-philadelphia-museum|website=Philly.com|accessdate=13 April 2015}}</ref> The President of [[List of Wikimedia chapters|Wikimedia D.C.]], James Hare, noted that "a lot of black history is left out" of Wikipedia, due to articles predominately being written by white editors.<ref name=NYtimes>{{cite web|last1=Smith|first1=Jada|title=Howard University Fills in Wikipedia’s Gaps in Black History|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/20/us/at-howard-a-historically-black-university-filling-in-wikipedias-gaps-in-color.html|website=[[The New York Times]]|accessdate=13 April 2015}}</ref> Articles that do exist on African topics have been accused of being [[ethnocentric]], as a result of mostly being edited by editors from Europe, and North America.<ref name=BusinessDay>{{cite web|last1=Goko|first1=Colleen|title=Drive launched to ‘Africanise’ Wikipedia|url=http://www.bdlive.co.za/business/technology/2013/09/23/drive-launched-to-africanise-wikipedia|website=BusinessDay|accessdate=13 April 2015}}</ref> Maira Liriano of the [[Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture]], has argued that the lack of information regarding [[black history]] on Wikipedia "makes it seem like it's not important."<ref name="Fast Company">{{cite web|last1=Cassano|first1=Jay|title=Black History Matters, So Why Is Wikipedia Missing So Much Of It?|url=http://www.fastcoexist.com/3041572/black-history-matters-so-why-is-wikipedia-missing-so-much-of-it|website=[[Fast Company (magazine)|Fast Company]]|accessdate=13 April 2015}}</ref>
Discrimination on wikipedia has been a source of controversy. David Auerbach stated in [[Slate Magazine]] that Wikipedia is amazing, but that it’s become a rancorous, sexist, elitist, stupidly bureaucratic mess. <ref name="slate.com">{{cite web|url=http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/12/wikipedia_editing_disputes_the_crowdsourced_encyclopedia_has_become_a_rancorous.html|title=Wikipedia editing disputes: The crowdsourced encyclopedia has become a rancorous, sexist mess.|work=Slate Magazine}}</ref> The lack of diversity has led the [[National Science Foundation]] to commission to studies on this problem. <ref name="wired.com">{{cite web|url=http://www.wired.com/2015/03/wikipedia-sexism/|title=Meet the Editors Fighting Racism and Sexism on Wikipedia|work=WIRED}}</ref> One for 132,000 and one for 70,000. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://nypost.com/2014/07/30/why-is-wikipedia-so-sexist/|title=Why is Wikipedia so sexist?|work=New York Post}}</ref>


Different theories have been provided to explain these racial discrepancies. Jay Cassano, writing for [[Fast Company (magazine)|Fast Company]], argued that Wikipedia's small proportion of black editors, is a result of the small black presence within the tech sector, and a relative lack of reliable access to the internet.<ref name="Fast Company"/> Katherine Mayer, chief communications officer for the [[Wikimedia Foundation]], has argued that focuses in Wikipedia's content are representative of those of society as a whole. She claimed that Wikipedia could only represent that which was referenced in [[secondary sources]], which historically have been favourable towards white men.<ref name=Wired>{{cite web|last1=Lapowsky|first1=Issie|title=Meet the Editors Fighting Racism and Sexism on Wikipedia|url=http://www.wired.com/2015/03/wikipedia-sexism/|website=[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]|accessdate=13 April 2015}}</ref>


Attempts have been made to rectify racial biases through [[edit-a-thon]]s, organised events at which Wikipedia editors attempt to improve coverage of certain topics and train new editors. In February 2015, multiple edit-a-thons were organised to commemorate [[Black History Month]] in the [[United States of America]]. The [[White House]] organised an edit-a-thon to create and improve articles on [[African Americans]] in [[STEM]].<ref name=Wired/> The Schomburg Center, [[Howard University]], and [[National Public Radio]], also coordinated edit-a-thons to improve coverage of black history.<ref name=NYtimes/>
==Basis==
With 90% of editors on wikipedia being men an unbalance exists.<ref name="bustle.com">{{cite web|url=http://www.bustle.com/articles/34316-wikipedia-sexism-is-so-entrenched-even-the-governments-trying-to-fix-it%7ctitle=Bustle%7cwork=bustle.com|title=Bustle|work=bustle.com}}</ref> 80% of wikipedians are young, white, childless men. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.forbes.com/sites/deannazandt/2013/04/26/yes-wikipedia-is-sexist-thats-why-it-needs-you/|title=Yes, Wikipedia Is Sexist -- That's Why It Needs You|author=Deanna Zandt|date=26 April 2013|work=Forbes}}</ref> Academics and professionals have urged wikipedia to address the problem of the lack of women on wikipedia.<ref name="bustle.com"/> Womens topics are often smaller then mens topics. <ref name="bustle.com"/> The content can often be biased, misleading and even sexist. <ref name="bustle.com"/> Some methods that have been used was to push groups such as American Novelists into American Female Novelists leading towards a group being unable to be found on general searches. <ref name=nyt>http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/opinion/sunday/wikipedias-sexism.html?_r=0</ref> Some men though believe that being proactive in women's topics is discriminatory against men. <ref name="othersociologist.com">{{cite web|url=http://othersociologist.com/2014/06/08/wikipedia-sexism-yesallwomen/|title=Sexism|work=The Other Sociologist - Analysis of Difference... By Dr Zuleyka Zevallos}}</ref> Discrimination is sometimes blamed on a single rogue editor. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/04/sexism-on-wikipedia-is-not-the-work-of-a-single-misguided-editor/275405/|title=Sexism on Wikipedia Is Not the Work of 'a Single Misguided Editor'|author=Amanda Filipacchi|date=30 April 2013|work=The Atlantic}}</ref> It has been hypothesized that the male wikipedian doesn't believe that females belong on their page. <ref name="othersociologist.com"/> The wikipedia page, systematic bias, highlights the problem which is created by shared social and cultural characteristics of most editors. <ref name="fastcoexist.com">{{cite web|url=http://www.fastcoexist.com/3041572/black-history-matters-so-why-is-wikipedia-missing-so-much-of-it|title=Black History Matters, So Why Is Wikipedia Missing So Much Of It?|work=Co.Exist}}</ref> This creates an unbalance on articles written on wikipedia. <ref name="fastcoexist.com"/> Black history as a result is often ignored on wikipedia. <ref name="fastcoexist.com"/> Maira Liriano director of the [[ Schomburg Center]] has stated that "There is a gap that exists when it comes to people of color on Wikipedia, both as subjects of articles and as contributors." <ref name="fastcoexist.com"/> She also stresed that "Black life matters, and one way you can demonstrate that is by having a really strong presence in Wikipedia and having a voice,"<ref name="fastcoexist.com"/> It is stated that it is a two part program of having the entries there on wikipedia of giving people the skill to edit wikipedia. <ref name="fastcoexist.com"/>

==Leisure==
It is believed that old encyclopedia's were written by old European men. <ref name="wired.com"/> Wikipedia was suppposed to change this but the problem exists in the amount of leisure time that is available. <ref name="wired.com"/> Women in general have less leisure time than men. <ref name="wired.com"/> One wikipedia administrator has offered oppinions on why Blacks don't volunteer on wikipedia, this includes blacks don't volunteer, blacks edit towards a black perspective, blacks are oppressed, poorly educated, computer illiterate, and those who are computer literate are too busy to volunteer. <ref name="auto">examiner.com/article/leading-wikipedian-explains-why-blacks-don-t-volunteer</ref> The same administrator stated that few blacks are interested in wikipedia enough to edit it. <ref name="auto"/> The Bureau of Labor Statistics has stated that African Americans are the second most group in the United States for volunteering. <ref name="auto"/> The same administrator who made those comments was highlighted in the article as having been fined while working as an attorney for solicitation. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.findlaw.com/co-supreme-court/1360976.html|title=PEOPLE v. BAUDER|work=Findlaw}}</ref> It is stated that hate speech is dealt with swiftly, but the more subtle hate speech is tricky to deal with. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://ncronline.org/news/faith-parish/wikipedias-edit-wars-and-eight-religious-pages-people-cant-stop-editing|title=Wikipedia's edit wars and the eight religious pages people can't stop editing|work=ncronline.org}}</ref>

==Documented Cases==
Authors attempted to document problems on wikipedia have had their articles heavily edited.<ref name=nyt/> Libertarian feminist [[Carol Moore]] was indefinitely banned over uncivil comments while men she fought against were given a slap on the wrist. <ref name="slate.com"/> There is stated to be a group of individuals called the Unblockables, whom due to their popularity can "get away with murder" on wikipedia. <ref name="slate.com"/> Experienced editors have been known to use terms like BLP, AGF, NOR to get their way on new users in disputes. <ref name="slate.com"/> Complaints have been "boomeranged" onto complaintants who face disciplinary action for complaining. <ref name="slate.com"/> A common tactic by experienced users is to tag new users Single Purpose Accounts to discount their opinions. <ref name="slate.com1">{{cite web|url=http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/12/wikipedia_editing_disputes_the_crowdsourced_encyclopedia_has_become_a_rancorous.2.html|title=Wikipedia editing disputes: The crowdsourced encyclopedia has become a rancorous, sexist mess.|work=Slate Magazine}}</ref> Those who are more combative in disputes tend to be prevail within those disputes. <ref name="thinkprogress.org">{{cite web|url=http://thinkprogress.org/culture/2015/03/06/3629086/wikipedia-gamergate-war/|title=The 'Five Horsemen' Of Wikipedia Paid The Price For Getting Between Trolls And Their Victims - ThinkProgress|work=ThinkProgress}}</ref> The abusive relationships between editors has made wikipedia a less welcoming place for women and minorities. <ref name="wired.com"/> Administrator rarely lose their privileges and their actions almost always stand whether fair or not. <ref name="slate.com1"/>

==Efforts==
Efforts have been made via edit a thons to increase minority articles and editors. <ref name="wired.com"/> [[Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture]] has made efforts to increase minority participation on wikipedia. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.essence.com/2015/02/03/wikipedia-getting-lesson-black-history/|title=Editors to Make Black History Wikipedia Entries More Inclusive - Essence.com|work=Essence.com}}</ref> [[Howard University]] has also made efforts to increase minority participation. <ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/20/us/at-howard-a-historically-black-university-filling-in-wikipedias-gaps-in-color.html?_r=0</ref> Some have been as large as 40 people. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.businessinsider.com/growing-army-of-women-take-on-wikipedia-2014-2|title=Growing Army Of Women Take On Wikipedia - Business Insider|date=15 February 2014|work=Business Insider}}</ref> Wikipedia is aware of its goal and hopes to increase the female participation of wikipedia to 25% by 2015. <ref name="bustle.com"/> The Whitehouse has even brought forth an editathon to showcase African American STEM prescence on the web. <ref>https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/02/23/telling-untold-stories-african-americans-stem</ref> The efforts are a form of activism, but are not rewriting history or putting a spin on it.<ref name="philly.com">{{cite web|url=http://articles.philly.com/2015-03-26/entertainment/60480419_1_new-artists-american-art-philadelphia-museum|title=Edit-athon aims to put left-out black artists into Wikipedia|work=philly-archives}}</ref> The ultimate goal is to provide facts so that the perspectives of minority groups will not be silenced. <ref name="philly.com"/> Wikipedia has pushed for more gender and racial diversity. <ref name="thinkprogress.org"/> There is hope by black professionals that Black wikipedia can take off in the same manner as black twitter. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://colorlines.com/archives/2015/02/can_black_wikipedia_take_off_like_black_twitter.html|title=Can ‘Black Wikipedia’ Take Off Like ‘Black Twitter’?|work=COLORLINES}}</ref>

==See also==
==See also==
*[[Gender bias on Wikipedia]]<br />
*[[Gender bias on Wikipedia]]<br />

Revision as of 23:09, 13 April 2015

Part of a series on
Discrimination
Forms
Attributes
Social
Religious
Ethnic/national
Manifestations
Policies
Countermeasures
Related topics

Wikipedia has been criticized for having a systematic racial bias in its coverage, due to an under-representation of people of colour within its editor base. [1] The President of Wikimedia D.C., James Hare, noted that "a lot of black history is left out" of Wikipedia, due to articles predominately being written by white editors.[2] Articles that do exist on African topics have been accused of being ethnocentric, as a result of mostly being edited by editors from Europe, and North America.[3] Maira Liriano of the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture, has argued that the lack of information regarding black history on Wikipedia "makes it seem like it's not important."[4]

Different theories have been provided to explain these racial discrepancies. Jay Cassano, writing for Fast Company, argued that Wikipedia's small proportion of black editors, is a result of the small black presence within the tech sector, and a relative lack of reliable access to the internet.[4] Katherine Mayer, chief communications officer for the Wikimedia Foundation, has argued that focuses in Wikipedia's content are representative of those of society as a whole. She claimed that Wikipedia could only represent that which was referenced in secondary sources, which historically have been favourable towards white men.[5]

Attempts have been made to rectify racial biases through edit-a-thons, organised events at which Wikipedia editors attempt to improve coverage of certain topics and train new editors. In February 2015, multiple edit-a-thons were organised to commemorate Black History Month in the United States of America. The White House organised an edit-a-thon to create and improve articles on African Americans in STEM.[5] The Schomburg Center, Howard University, and National Public Radio, also coordinated edit-a-thons to improve coverage of black history.[2]

See also

References

  1. ^ Melamed, Samantha. "Edit-athon aims to put left-out black artists into Wikipedia". Philly.com. Retrieved 13 April 2015.
  2. ^ a b Smith, Jada. "Howard University Fills in Wikipedia's Gaps in Black History". The New York Times. Retrieved 13 April 2015.
  3. ^ Goko, Colleen. "Drive launched to 'Africanise' Wikipedia". BusinessDay. Retrieved 13 April 2015.
  4. ^ a b Cassano, Jay. "Black History Matters, So Why Is Wikipedia Missing So Much Of It?". Fast Company. Retrieved 13 April 2015.
  5. ^ a b Lapowsky, Issie. "Meet the Editors Fighting Racism and Sexism on Wikipedia". Wired. Retrieved 13 April 2015.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Racial_bias_on_Wikipedia&oldid=656348454"