Misplaced Pages

:Paid operatives: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:10, 24 February 2012 editKenatipo (talk | contribs)9,739 edits re-write to shorten overblown Nutshell.← Previous edit Revision as of 19:32, 24 February 2012 edit undoWritegeist (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,187 edits rm personal attack, weasel words, and irrelevant section that's not about paid political operatives (repeatedly stipulated as the essay topic in the nutshell panel and para immediately following - to which added one additional stipulation).Next edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
{{essay}} {{essay}}
{{Nutshell|This essay is a discussion of paid political operatives, the Conflict of Interest guideline (]), the relationship between the two, and how it affects the Misplaced Pages. It is also a repository for storing related discussions from elsewhere on the Misplaced Pages.}} {{Nutshell|This essay is a discussion of paid political operatives, the Conflict of Interest guideline (]), the relationship between the two, and how it affects Misplaced Pages. It is also a repository for storing related discussions from elsewhere on Misplaced Pages.}}


This is an essay, in the early stages of construction, about the issue of paid political operatives editing Misplaced Pages. This page is a repository for editors to store information, arguments for and against paid operatives, conversations, and gleanings to do with the topic. This essay was formed to systemically address issues regarding paid editing of political articles and discussion pages on Misplaced Pages, in which people are compensated to create and edit Misplaced Pages articles. This essay is not about public relations (PR) or PR personnel. This is an essay, in the early stages of construction, about the issue of paid political operatives editing Misplaced Pages. This page is a repository for editors to store information, arguments for and against paid operatives, conversations, and gleanings to do with the topic. This essay was formed to systemically address issues regarding paid editing of political articles and discussion pages on Misplaced Pages, in which political operatives are compensated to create and edit Misplaced Pages articles. This essay is not about public relations (PR) or PR personnel.


Editors are encouraged to share even those facts and opinions which demonstrate the shortcomings of the project, its policies, its decision making structure and its leaders pertaining to paid political operatives. Discussion ''about this essay'' belongs on its talk page. Editors are encouraged to share even those facts and opinions which demonstrate the shortcomings of the project, its policies, its decision making structure and its leaders pertaining to paid political operatives. Discussion ''about this essay'' belongs on its talk page.


Discourse is limited by the expectation that even difficult situations will be resolved in a dignified fashion, and by policies which prohibit behavior such as personal attacks and legal threats. Editors who have genuine grievances against others are expected to use the dispute resolution mechanism rather than engage in unbridled criticism across all available forums. Editors in general, regardless of permission level, are reminded not to engage in conduct that will not directly improve the level of discourse in a discussion. Personal attacks, profanity, inappropriate use of humour, and other uncivil conduct that leads to a breakdown in discussion can prevent the formation of a valid consensus. Blocks or other restrictions may be used to address repeated or particularly severe disruption of this nature. A prime consideration of all editors should always be to foster a collaborative environment within the community as a whole. Discourse is limited by the expectation that even difficult situations will be resolved in a dignified fashion, and by policies which prohibit behavior such as personal attacks and legal threats. Editors who have genuine grievances against others are expected to use the dispute resolution mechanism rather than engage in unbridled criticism across all available forums. Editors in general, regardless of permission level, are reminded not to engage in conduct that will not directly improve the level of discourse in a discussion. Personal attacks, profanity, inappropriate use of humour, and other uncivil conduct that leads to a breakdown in discussion can prevent the formation of a valid consensus. Blocks or other restrictions may be used to address repeated or particularly severe disruption of this nature. A prime consideration of all editors should always be to foster a collaborative environment within the community as a whole.



==Conflict of interest (WP:COI), a behavioral guideline== ==Conflict of interest (WP:COI), a behavioral guideline==
Line 29: Line 28:
==Publicity about operatives covertly working on Misplaced Pages political articles== ==Publicity about operatives covertly working on Misplaced Pages political articles==
The issue of covert political editing was in an article covering some examples current at the time, and also one from a year earlier. The issue of covert political editing was in an article covering some examples current at the time, and also one from a year earlier.

==''The New York Times'' edits our articles from an IP address==
As user ] has pointed out, ''The New York Times'' edits our articles (more than 800 edits as of February 2012) from an IP address registered to it:
, including 2 edits by ] to his own BLP and that of his deceased father. Many of these IP edits are to BLPs of ''NYT'' employees. Very few are to Talk pages. Assuming the folks making edits from this IP are ''NYT'' employees, they are "Paid Operatives". Whether the edits are "political" or not could be determined by reviewing them all.
:Just being an employee is not really an issue unless part of your job description is "Edit Misplaced Pages Articles/Talk pages.```]<small>]</small> 13:57, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
::I wonder if "Edit Misplaced Pages Articles/Talk pages" is in Joe DeSantis's job description. --] <sup>]</sup> 18:22, 23 February 2012 (UTC)


==Conversation with operative== ==Conversation with operative==
Line 44: Line 37:
#'''Question #1''' -- If paid operatives disclose their vested interest in, say, their WP signature and also include a statement of self-disclosure with each edit request they post to (1) the Talk pages of articles about the people and/or organizations that pay them to promote their interests, and (2) the Talk pages of the editors they ask to act on their behalf, then their activity here does not contravene ]. But as their paid work is to promote the interests of a politician or a party-political apparatus, doesn't their concern for promoting their paymasters' images and interests (and thus their own interests) ultimately and inevitably trump their concern for the interests of Misplaced Pages? #'''Question #1''' -- If paid operatives disclose their vested interest in, say, their WP signature and also include a statement of self-disclosure with each edit request they post to (1) the Talk pages of articles about the people and/or organizations that pay them to promote their interests, and (2) the Talk pages of the editors they ask to act on their behalf, then their activity here does not contravene ]. But as their paid work is to promote the interests of a politician or a party-political apparatus, doesn't their concern for promoting their paymasters' images and interests (and thus their own interests) ultimately and inevitably trump their concern for the interests of Misplaced Pages?
#:'''Reply #1''': Not necessarily. Their interests very often coincide with the interests of Misplaced Pages. Their edits improve the encyclopedia by removing information that is libellous, incorrect, uncited, misleading, given undue emphasis, unnecessarily negative, prejudicial, tasteless or otherwise unencyclopedic. Anyone who makes such edits is improving Misplaced Pages, regardless who their employer is. If a paid operative makes edits that don't conform to policy, then he will be reverted, especially in an election year when lots of others are watching. #:'''Reply #1''': Not necessarily. Their interests very often coincide with the interests of Misplaced Pages. Their edits improve the encyclopedia by removing information that is libellous, incorrect, uncited, misleading, given undue emphasis, unnecessarily negative, prejudicial, tasteless or otherwise unencyclopedic. Anyone who makes such edits is improving Misplaced Pages, regardless who their employer is. If a paid operative makes edits that don't conform to policy, then he will be reverted, especially in an election year when lots of others are watching.
#:'''Reply #2''': It is logical to assume that a paid operatives real life responsibilities (home mortgage, car payment, college funds, bills, etc) are of more concern to "hypothetical' him than the unbiased status of a Misplaced Pages article. 'Hypotheitical' he fulfills his RL committments via his employer, not Misplaced Pages. #:'''Reply #2''': It is logical to assume that a paid operative's real life responsibilities (home mortgage, car payment, college funds, bills, etc) are of more concern to him than the unbiased status of a Misplaced Pages article. He fulfills his RL committments via his employer, not Misplaced Pages.



# '''Question #2''' -- The issue is not just one individual, but paid political operatives in general. Most will work here unnamed, undisclosed and undercover. We only know one by name, and the name of his employer. That's because he operates here under his own name and also clearly discloses his job as communications director for a political campaign organization. For other paid political operatives, his transparent modus operandi is an exemplary guide to obeying the letter of the WP:COI "laws". Yet no others have emulated him. Why? # '''Question #2''' -- The issue is not just one individual, but paid political operatives in general. Most will work here unnamed, undisclosed and undercover. We only know one by name, and the name of his employer. That's because he operates here under his own name and also clearly discloses his job as communications director for a political campaign organization. For other paid political operatives, his transparent modus operandi is an exemplary guide to obeying the letter of the WP:COI "laws". Yet no others have emulated him. Why?
#:'''Reply #1''': You ask why? Because one <s>zealot</s> editor appears to be on a crusade against "Paid Operatives" (i.e. Joe DeSantis), bringing Joe negative attention in the media (whose reporting distorts his editing activity here). Who needs that?
::::Note: It is assumed that the zealot referred to above is User:Buster7. Be advised, there is no crusade and B7 is neither fanatical nor partisan. The issue is "paid to edit".


==Conversations at Jimbo's talk page and at ANI== ==Conversations at Jimbo's talk page and at ANI==

Revision as of 19:32, 24 February 2012

Essay on editing Misplaced Pages
This is an essay.
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Misplaced Pages contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Misplaced Pages's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
This page in a nutshell: This essay is a discussion of paid political operatives, the Conflict of Interest guideline (WP:COI), the relationship between the two, and how it affects Misplaced Pages. It is also a repository for storing related discussions from elsewhere on Misplaced Pages.

This is an essay, in the early stages of construction, about the issue of paid political operatives editing Misplaced Pages. This page is a repository for editors to store information, arguments for and against paid operatives, conversations, and gleanings to do with the topic. This essay was formed to systemically address issues regarding paid editing of political articles and discussion pages on Misplaced Pages, in which political operatives are compensated to create and edit Misplaced Pages articles. This essay is not about public relations (PR) or PR personnel.

Editors are encouraged to share even those facts and opinions which demonstrate the shortcomings of the project, its policies, its decision making structure and its leaders pertaining to paid political operatives. Discussion about this essay belongs on its talk page.

Discourse is limited by the expectation that even difficult situations will be resolved in a dignified fashion, and by policies which prohibit behavior such as personal attacks and legal threats. Editors who have genuine grievances against others are expected to use the dispute resolution mechanism rather than engage in unbridled criticism across all available forums. Editors in general, regardless of permission level, are reminded not to engage in conduct that will not directly improve the level of discourse in a discussion. Personal attacks, profanity, inappropriate use of humour, and other uncivil conduct that leads to a breakdown in discussion can prevent the formation of a valid consensus. Blocks or other restrictions may be used to address repeated or particularly severe disruption of this nature. A prime consideration of all editors should always be to foster a collaborative environment within the community as a whole.

Conflict of interest (WP:COI), a behavioral guideline

  • A Misplaced Pages conflict of interest (COI) is an incompatibility between the aim of Misplaced Pages, which is to produce a neutral, reliably sourced encyclopedia, and the aims of an individual editor. COI editing involves contributing to Misplaced Pages in order to promote your own interests or those of other individuals, companies, or groups. From WP:COI
  • Where advancing outside interests is more important to an editor than advancing the aims of Misplaced Pages, that editor stands in a conflict of interest. From WP:COI

Comments from around Misplaced Pages

  • Because of the essentially non-actionable nature of WP:COI, my firsthand impression of COI/N is that it mostly inflames situations rather than help solve them. 21 February 2012
  • A small coterie of editors used the noticeboard as just another platform to air their views without restraint while they treated the actual conflict of interest policy as a minor side show few cared to see. At WP:COI, 2007
  • The main problem is where to draw the line. Is common membership of an external site sufficient to qualify as a conflict of interest? What about members of the same WikiProject? People editing from the same household? The same university? Married couples, de facto couples, girlfriends, associates? Members of the same Wikimedia chapter who work together? People self-identifying as belonging to the same club, group or political party? People from the same city, state or country? There is serious potential to create a precedent that bestows momentum to the issue, starting its movement down that slippery slope. If ArbCom is going to make a ruling on conflict of interest, it would be in ArbCom's best interests to establish as bright a line as possible in defining what does or does not constitute a conflict of interest. If such a line can't be defined, any decision ArbCom were to render on the matter would be at serious risk of being undermined by its own ambiguity. Precedents are even more subject to the doctrine of unintended consequences than anything else. From a User talk page (22Feb2012)
  • But I believe the process works - there are enough editors on all sides of issues and on no side of issues, to keep these articles balanced, accurate, and shaped in the way they want, without any chilling effect or hesitance to shoot down the respectfully worded campaign requests. Joe is doing what we told him is ok to do - my quarrel is not with how he has proceeded after he stopped editing directly - my concern, as I have said, is that we have here an imbalance, where by definition he is going to be viewed as more of an "expert" on the subject than the rest of us, but his expertise is of course biased, and I think the organic development and editing of articles by people with opinions of course, but not paychecks fueling them, is what makes Misplaced Pages great. From Talk:Gingrich Campaign, 2012, 22Feb2012

Jimbo's support of a paid political operative's openness and modus operandi

  • == Thank you ==

Thank you for being open about your identity and treating the community with respect. Reviewing your edit history, I see that you have not made any edits to article space (only talk pages) for many months - this is a very good thing indeed. Please know that as long as you continue following these practices, I will support your participation and use it as a model for others.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 12:15, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

from the operative's talk page, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Jimbo recommends vigilance

" ... I think it is good to keep a close eye on - the media will be watching his every edit..." Jimbo Wales

from Jimbo Wales (talk) 13:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Publicity about operatives covertly working on Misplaced Pages political articles

The issue of covert political editing was aired in 2006 in an article covering some examples current at the time, and also one from a year earlier.

Conversation with operative

  • ==Behind the 8 Ball==

As I'm sure you are aware, I don't and will not attack you. Other editors may interpret my questions and a pursuit of answers as attacks but that is the self-imposed limitation of those editors. Paid operatives are not a new issue w/ me. I spent many long hours at the Sarah Palin article, in 2008, in discussions about that very subject. The existence of campaign staff members at the articles about the candidate for which they work is a foregone conclusion. I respect the fact that you came forward. Misplaced Pages is too good a free source not to embrace as a vehicle. I have no gripe against you. I just can't see how you can do your job and still remain impartial. If your title was Comm Dir for the Republican Party I might grasp the possibility. I have no beef as long as you remain transparent. I have no beef if edits by volunteer editors, that germinate from Gingrich HeadQuarters, are clearly noted as such, at least at the talk Page. One last thing about the article. It mentions a changing of staff personel somewhere along the line. But then no mention is made of re-staffing. The reader is left in the dark as to how many, which positions, etc. The impression I get is that there was a major shift in direction and new staff people came on board...but no mention is made of it. BTW...Were you a part of that changeover? FYI...I am not a REP or a DEM. I am a libertarian (note the small "ell"). ```Buster Seven Talk 06:28, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

BOLD IMPLEMENTED AFTER TRANSFER FROM EDITORS PAGE

Q&A

  1. Question #1 -- If paid operatives disclose their vested interest in, say, their WP signature and also include a statement of self-disclosure with each edit request they post to (1) the Talk pages of articles about the people and/or organizations that pay them to promote their interests, and (2) the Talk pages of the editors they ask to act on their behalf, then their activity here does not contravene WP:COI. But as their paid work is to promote the interests of a politician or a party-political apparatus, doesn't their concern for promoting their paymasters' images and interests (and thus their own interests) ultimately and inevitably trump their concern for the interests of Misplaced Pages?
    Reply #1: Not necessarily. Their interests very often coincide with the interests of Misplaced Pages. Their edits improve the encyclopedia by removing information that is libellous, incorrect, uncited, misleading, given undue emphasis, unnecessarily negative, prejudicial, tasteless or otherwise unencyclopedic. Anyone who makes such edits is improving Misplaced Pages, regardless who their employer is. If a paid operative makes edits that don't conform to policy, then he will be reverted, especially in an election year when lots of others are watching.
    Reply #2: It is logical to assume that a paid operative's real life responsibilities (home mortgage, car payment, college funds, bills, etc) are of more concern to him than the unbiased status of a Misplaced Pages article. He fulfills his RL committments via his employer, not Misplaced Pages.
  1. Question #2 -- The issue is not just one individual, but paid political operatives in general. Most will work here unnamed, undisclosed and undercover. We only know one by name, and the name of his employer. That's because he operates here under his own name and also clearly discloses his job as communications director for a political campaign organization. For other paid political operatives, his transparent modus operandi is an exemplary guide to obeying the letter of the WP:COI "laws". Yet no others have emulated him. Why?

Conversations at Jimbo's talk page and at ANI

Archives

Elsewhere on WP

Pertinent guidelines

Request edit

The following Request edit box should accompany ALL edit requests by a Paid Operative as advised at WP:SCOIC which reads;
  • 3)....Create a new section by clicking the "+" or "new section" tab at the top of the page. Title it "Proposed change" or "Proposed addition." Type {{request edit}}.
It is requested that an edit be made to this article that the user below does not want to make because of a conflict of interest.
Please review the request below and make the edit if the edit is well cited, neutral, and follows other Misplaced Pages guidelines and policies.
To the user using this template: please explain your conflict of interest in detail below.
Please replace the {{Request edit}} template with {{tld|Request edit}} when the request is handled.

{{Request edit}}

Driving the bus

  • The Bus is symbolic of all political articles.
  • Paid operatives should never drive the Bus, and should not be allowed by other editors to even at any time have their hands on the steering wheel of the Bus.
  • Paid operatives are passengers on the bus just like the other editors. They have no special seating assignment, no reduced fare, no GPS control of where the Bus is headed, no special permission to be a spokesman for the Bus company.
  • Paido operatives should only ask the opinions of the Bus drivers (other editors).
  • Paid operatives should never direct the drivers of the Bus where to go and what to say when they get there unless the direction is agreed upon via consensus of the passengers.

Astrosurfing

A type of or part of a political campaign that is conducted via public relations, television, radio, the Internet, demonstrations, etc that seek to use aspects within the popular culture to influence the voting public and thereby the voting outcome. Astroturf refers to a synthetic grass replacement for real grass popular in outdoor sporting venues in the 70s, 80s and 90s. Astroturfing is a strategy using a specific demographic or a diverse group of people to push a political agenda, sometimes without their knowledge. Astroturfers promote others to action by spreading disinformation and/or minimizing the dissemination of negative information either for or against a specific politician, political organization or legislation. Astroturfers most often act at the behest of an organization or individual with a stake in the successful outcome of a political campaign.

Further reading

External links

General


Misplaced Pages key policies and guidelines (?)
Content (?)
P
G
Conduct (?)
P
G
Deletion (?)
P
Enforcement (?)
P
Editing (?)
P
G
Style
Classification
Project content (?)
G
WMF (?)
P
Categories:
Misplaced Pages:Paid operatives: Difference between revisions Add topic