[WikiEN-l] Defamation policy hypothetical

[Sam Korn]

On 8/18/06, jahiegel <jahiegel at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Sam's comments surely invite the question around which, relative to BLP, we
> often dance: ought ethical or moral impulses ever to affect our editing?

I'd argue that the only reasons I edit Wikipedia are ethical and
moral, so a resounding yes :-)

> Consider a situation in which unsourced criticism appears in a biography.
> Assume arguendo that we can be certain that the subject will not essay a
> legal claim against the Foundation and that we can be relatively certain
> that bad press will not entail (an issue that, for the purposes of this
> discussion, we set aside in any case).  Should, then, we treat that
> unsourced negativity in a fashion different from that in which we'd treat
> unsourced comments in, to pick the first three random articles I find,
> [[Mancor de la Vall]], [[Sherston Software]], or [[Danzig III: How the Gods
> Kill]]?

Ideally, no, we should not.  Ideally, we apply WP:V and WP:NPOV
equally to every edit.  What's more, we'd ideally apply WP:AGF equally
to every edit.  *However*, living people are significantly different
to your example by the very fact that people are more likely to insert
damaging and embarassing "facts" about them than about your examples.
>From a purely pragmatic approach, it is not difficult to see that
articles concerning living individuals are a high target for vandals
and thus need to be scrutinised especially carefully.

> Concerns w/r/to prospective legal liability and bad press aside (which
> concerns can be, I think, persuasively allayed), a certain "do no harm"
> motivation tends to underline BLP.  In view of the failure to command a
> consensus of either [[Wikipedia:Wikiethics]] or [[WP:NOT EVIL]], and of the
> disfavoring by the community of Jimbo's "human dignity" formulation with
> respect to deletion, I cannot abide the suggestion that the community writ
> large truly believe, legal/publicity concerns aside, that we ever ought to
> concern ourselves with the external consequences of our editing.

I have outlined my pragmatic reasoning for taking special
considerations above.  I also feel there is a very powerful moral
argument.

We don't ask people if they want a Wikipedia biography about them.
They have no say in the matter (ask, for example, Daniel Brandt or
Angela).  They get them, like it or not.  I believe that, in writing
articles about them, we have a duty to get our facts right.  This
applies across the encyclopaedia for the sake of editors, but
especially on articles about living people for the sake of the
subjects themselves.

>
> Such consideration is plainly, IMHO, unencyclopedic; not only ought we to
> edit with dispassion (NPOV), but so too ought we to edit with disinterest,
> such that we ought not to care whether the Googling of a biographical
> subject returns results that contain inaccurate and defamatory material (I,
> fof course, cannot comprehend why any individual editor, in view of
> other-than-project-related concerns, would ever care).
>
> To say that BLP is necessary because, even as it may infrequently forcelose
> an editor's adding encyclopedic information, it prevents the project from
> incurring costs related to defending the Foundation against legal action or
> helps the project to avoid bad publicity, from which might follow the
> departure of editors, the departure of readers, and/or the departure of
> donors, is one thing; to say that the moral concerns of editors, legal/bad
> publicity concerns notwithstanding, is quite another.
>
> Cordially,
>
>
> Joe
> [[User:Jahiegel]]
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sam Korn" <smoddy at gmail.com>
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 2:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Defamation policy
>
>
> > On 8/18/06, stevertigo <vertigosteve at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> In the context of WP:OFFICE, as well as more recently, Jimbo and others
> >> have
> >> written somethings about "hurt feelings," as if it was a policy (
> >> WP:CODDLE
> >> maybe) which could circumvent even important policy ( WP:NPOV maybe).
> >> Could
> >> you explain this?
> >
> > No. No no no no no.  That is not the aim at all.  NPOV can never be
> > compromised.  All that is different between a biography of a living
> > person and, for example, an article on the geography of southern
> > Brazil is that it is more likely that the article on the living person
> > will have potentially defamatory information added.  This may or may
> > not lead to legal action, but it most certainly is likely to lead to
> > bad press for Wikipedia.
> >
> > All that is required is a more *rigourous* application of our
> > verifibility policy for these more sensitive articles.  That is not a
> > bad thing; indeed it is the real essence of NPOV.
> >
> > We don't live in some cloud-cuckoo land where our mistakes don't have
> > consequences.  They do.  The answer is to make sure that our mistakes
> > are quickly corrected and that the damage does not continue.
> >
> >> I agree with the idea of treating bios with care, but that does not
> >> necessarily
> >> necessitate the use of an entirely different methodology than any other
> >> wiki
> >> page - including censoring talk pages.
> >
> > No, an "entirely different methodology" is not needed.  All that is
> > needed is a more rigourous application of our current policies.  These
> > rely upon (yes, rely upon, not just use as a bonus) the use of common
> > sense.  Most unsourced claims do not need to be blitzed into oblivion.
> > Yet some do, and it is this balance that WP:LIVING must attempt to
> > measure.  It is better to be cautious in this area, because it is
> > reckless and thoroughly unacceptable to say "Oh, don't blame us that
> > our encylopaedia accuses you of being a repeat sex offender, it just
> > happens because of the wiki process.  It's your problem you're getting
> > so upset."
> >
> > --
> > Sam
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


-- 
Sam