Wikimedia Censors Wikinews

An anonymous reader writes "Wikileaks has revealed that the Wikimedia Foundation Board (which controls Wikipedia and Wikinews) has killed off a Wikinews report into the Barbara Bauer vs. Wikimedia Foundation lawsuit. Wikinews is a collaborative news site and is meant to be editorially independent from the WMF. The WMF office also suppressed a Wikinews investigation into child and other pornography on Wikipedia, which was independently covered by ValleyWag and other outlets this week. The US Communications Deceny Act section 230 grants providers of internet services (such as the Wikipedia and Wikinews) immunity from legal action related to their user-generated content provided they do not exercise pre-publication control. In deleting articles critical of the WMF prior to publication, Wikileaks says the Wikimedia Foundation may have set a dangerous precedent that could remove all of its CDA section 230 immunity (at least for Wikinews, where the control was exercised)."

Comments

Re:Hmm... what to do...

[willyhill]

I'm not going to add to the actual discussion at hand, but at the risk of dating myself, I have to mention that Pretty Baby was a huge controversy even before it was released. Theaters refused to run even the post-censorship sanitized version, various Defenders Of Decency Organizations panned it, it was all over the news, etc.

I saw the cut version a few years later and quite frankly I couldn't see what the problem was, but what do I know.

Compare Pretty Baby to Blue Lagoon, another prepubescent skin flick featuring Brooke Shields (this woman sure knew what she was doing I guess). Same controversy, pretty much. Even more so in the early 80s because the prude movement was starting to grow exponentially by then in response to the perceived excesses of the 60s and 70s.

But Pretty Baby was a huge deal back in the day.

OK, now I'll go back to playing Pong on my PDP-10.