Maybe I'm alone here but the part of the article about the NYT working with wikipedia for the past 7 months to censor information about their kidnapped journalist is more troubling to me than the article/Wikipedia change itself.
I understand their reasoning - and that thankfully it worked since the reporter is now safe - but doesn't it seem really odd for a leading newspaper to admit to working to censor news?
Not to sound completely paranoid or cliche but... Where does the NYT / Wikipedia draw the line on something like this? Is WP working with any organizations to censor information?
Comments
Maybe I'm alone here but the part of the article about the NYT working with wikipedia for the past 7 months to censor information about their kidnapped journalist is more troubling to me than the article/Wikipedia change itself.
I understand their reasoning - and that thankfully it worked since the reporter is now safe - but doesn't it seem really odd for a leading newspaper to admit to working to censor news?
Not to sound completely paranoid or cliche but... Where does the NYT / Wikipedia draw the line on something like this? Is WP working with any organizations to censor information?