This article reproduces a job request spotted on peopleperhour.com - I hope ukindymedia will accept it as relevant to the UK as although originating in America, the request was published on a London-based website and is therefore seeking to attract UK based writers. The request is reproduced verbatim. Read on!
Attacking Wikipedia Liberalism ... maybe we can help this guy get the "plenty of airtime and press" he desires, for free!
THAT People Per Hour REQUEST in full (Verbatim):
"I have "some" stock in a large online news organization.
I can "make sure this piece" get's plenty of airtime and Press.
I only mention this because I want to attract only professional writers. If you have never been published, please don't apply or if you do make sure you are damned good. I need a thesis...a study....a one of a kind paper trying to change an experiment gone wrong.
What I cannot do is go to my American counterparts and have them do the piece I am looking for. If it comes from an American, I fear it will be criticized to scorn needlessly.
I need the article of a lifetime, but you must feel the way my board and I do. You cannot fake this piece. This must be from the heart.
I am talking about Wikipedia.
Are you sick of Wikipedia being too biased? Liberal? One sided? Do you know of people, bands, writers who will NEVER be listed on this liberal rag because of their beliefs, race, etc?
Are you not notable either?
I am looking for a nice journalism piece.
I used to be a wiki supporter. My magazine has contributed over 1.4 million dollars in grants to this rag in the last 7 years. I thought it was something the Human race would benefit from. We thought it was right.
Over the years I have come to believe that wiki is a bunch of liberal writers who pick and choose who is "notable" and who is not. Who get's published and who does not. They tend to be liberal, especially about politics, the war, Muslims, etc....
I'm sick of it. I'm sick of it because the youth of the world depend on this rag for the truth and they are being fed lies.
Some are taking a crack and the Giant, but fall short:
http://newsbusters.org/node/5043
http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2007/03/conservapedia-hopes-to-fix-wikipedias-liberal-bias.ars
http://www.heymiller.com/2009/07/liberal-web/
What I want is a piece that "details" out in detail the liberalism of the Wiki machine. I want detail. I want you to give references, and maybe even interview several people in the press, and or artists that were not "notable".
I know several artists that have sold over 15 million Cd's or downloads and DO NOT appear anywhere on WIKI because they are not "notable". This is an ever growing trend, but it's worse with politics.
I will publish this article with the following title "An appeal to Wikipedia". It is an appeal. About a year ago I cut them off, and urged others not to donate as well. A month ago I started to see appeals for donations.
I think I have their attention but they don't know it's me. Now I want YOU to tell them why they should not have any money. I want you to show in detail what they must do to earn the respect of the human masses.
Sound interesting?"
END OF ARTICLE
Reproduced in the inerests of liberal writers everywhere!
THAT People Per Hour REQUEST in full (Verbatim):
"I have "some" stock in a large online news organization.
I can "make sure this piece" get's plenty of airtime and Press.
I only mention this because I want to attract only professional writers. If you have never been published, please don't apply or if you do make sure you are damned good. I need a thesis...a study....a one of a kind paper trying to change an experiment gone wrong.
What I cannot do is go to my American counterparts and have them do the piece I am looking for. If it comes from an American, I fear it will be criticized to scorn needlessly.
I need the article of a lifetime, but you must feel the way my board and I do. You cannot fake this piece. This must be from the heart.
I am talking about Wikipedia.
Are you sick of Wikipedia being too biased? Liberal? One sided? Do you know of people, bands, writers who will NEVER be listed on this liberal rag because of their beliefs, race, etc?
Are you not notable either?
I am looking for a nice journalism piece.
I used to be a wiki supporter. My magazine has contributed over 1.4 million dollars in grants to this rag in the last 7 years. I thought it was something the Human race would benefit from. We thought it was right.
Over the years I have come to believe that wiki is a bunch of liberal writers who pick and choose who is "notable" and who is not. Who get's published and who does not. They tend to be liberal, especially about politics, the war, Muslims, etc....
I'm sick of it. I'm sick of it because the youth of the world depend on this rag for the truth and they are being fed lies.
Some are taking a crack and the Giant, but fall short:
http://newsbusters.org/node/5043 http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2007/03/conservapedia-hopes-to-fix-wikipedias-liberal-bias.ars http://www.heymiller.com/2009/07/liberal-web/ What I want is a piece that "details" out in detail the liberalism of the Wiki machine. I want detail. I want you to give references, and maybe even interview several people in the press, and or artists that were not "notable".
I know several artists that have sold over 15 million Cd's or downloads and DO NOT appear anywhere on WIKI because they are not "notable". This is an ever growing trend, but it's worse with politics.
I will publish this article with the following title "An appeal to Wikipedia". It is an appeal. About a year ago I cut them off, and urged others not to donate as well. A month ago I started to see appeals for donations.
I think I have their attention but they don't know it's me. Now I want YOU to tell them why they should not have any money. I want you to show in detail what they must do to earn the respect of the human masses.
Sound interesting?"
END OF ARTICLE
Reproduced in the inerests of liberal writers everywhere!
Comments
Hide the following 5 comments
deleted
27.12.2011 16:29
even though i have had hundreds of exhibitions worldwide
i must add, that several of my postings to indymedia have also been deleted, because
the editors didn't like my comments
basically, if you don't own the platform, then you have no rights
god help all those facebook users :-)
heath bunting
e-mail:
heath@irational.org
Homepage:
http://irational.org/heath/
Useful research info
27.12.2011 18:30
Joe
re: deleted
27.12.2011 21:36
From your linked website: "He [Heath Bunting] is both Britain's most important practising artist and The World's most famous computer artist. He aspires to be a skillful member of the public and is producing an expert system for identity mutation."
Riiiiiight.
I'm all for supporting people with mental illness lead meaningful lives, but let's not delude ourselves here.
anon
Ordinary Geezer
28.12.2011 08:47
Big I am
How to get ahead in advertising (and wikipedia).
29.12.2011 21:05
Not interested in the original article or Wikipedia in general but the vast vast majority of articles about people on Wikipedia are written by the people themselves. That's also true for products and services too.
Bit silly to claim that Wikipedia entries are all written in the third party.
Its a basic tenet of all marketing to write in the third party tense so as to make the person, product or service appear more successful than it actually is.
That's why the vast vast majority of all marketing is fraud and not true.
Maurice Saatchi.