- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.zip
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.zip
You must log in or register to comment.
What are you doing India? This what happens when you elect a fascist government🤦♀️
Indian censorship is comically bad and living in this country, seeing day-to-day examples of this is a lot of fun. How shit of a direction this country is taking. Talk about a judge being completely out of touch with how Wikipedia works and functions. Dangerous tool my ass, useful tool to keep people in check. They tried blocking Proton now it’s Wikipedia… what’s next, google??? Since disinformation and misinformation can be found on it too? I swear nothing appeases them except blatant false information pandering to assholes like these.
India is become a censorship haven in all aspects slowly and slowly. It’s scary.
Exactly! " If you don’t like India, please don’t work in India…" bitch do you think this is Ford or Sony??
Blocking google would make sense
They should have just blocked India.
Censoring factual articles globally is an extremely bad precedent to set for yourself.
Agree.
Wikipedia is one of the giants that could easily geoblock a country and call it done.
If the general populace of the country in question has a problem with that, they can address it with their government or find alternative ways to access it.
Maybe there is a middle ground to be had that I can’t see, but kowtowing to the unreasonable demands of a pushy foreign government is idiotic.
Indians still deserve their information
You can’t give a deranged dictatorship global censorship authority.
That keeps the entire planet from access to information.
not sure it’d be better if they wrote censorship software to protect articles based on geolocated IP for this
there’s still https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International#Litigation_against_other_organisations
They already have the capability to block content locally.
There isn’t a worse option than allowing a government to globally block an article.
They already have the capability to block content locally.
If by “They” you mean Wikipedia, they don’t. Contempt of court risks excluding all Indian editors and readers from using Wikipedia along with hefty fines.
Yes, they do. They’ve done it in the past.
It literally doesn’t matter what Indian courts rule. Being banned from India is orders and orders of magnitude more acceptable than blocking a single article anywhere else on the planet. It single handedly eliminates all of their credibility.
India isn’t capable of enforcing fines against an organization that doesn’t operate in their country and there’s no chance a US court will enforce such an unhinged judgement. They can’t be forced to pay.
could you link to examples of the past?
Information is the power behind revolutions and popular democracy. I’d be surprised if the WMF didn’t check a web archive before taking down the article. The court case was already all over worldwide news before that anyways. If they took the article down from archives, that’d be a different story.
India isn’t capable of enforcing fines against an organization that doesn’t operate in their country
You serve a website in that country, you operate in that country. What say you about the GDPR?
I’ve heard there’s an article that is missing from Wikipedia worldwide because of India. Is it true and how can we read it otherwise?
Missing article was here It didn’t contain much other than dates it was filed and plaintiffs information. Which is a standard practice anywhere.
In July 2024, ANI filed a lawsuit against Wikimedia Foundation in the Delhi High Court — claiming to have been defamed in its article on Wikipedia — and sought ₹2 crore (US$240,000) in damages.[14][15][16] At the time of the suit’s filing, the Wikipedia article about ANI said the news agency had, “been accused of having served as a propaganda tool for the incumbent central government, distributing materials from a vast network of fake news websites, and misreporting events on multiple occasions”. The filing accused Wikipedia of publishing, “false and defamatory content with the malicious intent of tarnishing the news agency’s reputation, and aimed to discredit its goodwill”.[17][14][18][19]
The article is still up, Wikipedia calling ANI biased, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International
So not really sure, why the massive outrage. Removing intricate details from ongoing lawsuits is standard practice.
While the lawsuit by ANI demands that editors who made the edit claiming ANI as govt mouth piece be identified, Wikipedia hasn’t done it yet and the article is right about setting a dangerous precedent if high court forces Wikipedia to reveal the names. But at the same time article is biased and has misleading information such as > In an unprecedented move, Wikipedia removed the page from its platform on October 21.>
You can see some well noted examples of articles being removed before from Wikipedia here . So there is clearly precedent for removal of articles. I used love vox a decade ago, but now I see these half truths/partial stories are a commonplace and I’m happy to have ditched vox now.
