While launching a protest against an overzealous Wikipedia editor for deleting a link to an article I added, I noticed a hilarious thing. Apparently Wikipedia had not yet allowed an article on Digital Maoism to exist on its own. Instead it redirects to a bio article of Jaron Lanier, the man who coined the phrase. The irony of Wikipedia not providing a separate page about the concept about why online collectivism will corrode human thought is delicious.
See also: my thoughts about Wikipedia and vanity pages.
May 9 Update: I forgot to give the link of my previous NSFW post about Haley Paige which apparently was rejected by the Wikipedia editor as spam. Warning: my post has one semi-nude nonpornographic photo. The ludicrous thing about the rejection is that almost every link which was approved on the Haley Paige wikipedia page had pornographic pictures and porn banner ads. This is not surprising or intrinsically bad (because she worked in the industry), but the contrast between my own post (which was thoughtful and well-written and ad-free ) and the others (which were minimally informative and loaded with porn ads) was astounding. Even the non-adult link (a local newspaper) was replete with ads.
May 9 Update #2: Out of boredom I googled “Digital Maoism” to see what would show up. Keep in mind that the Edge discussion featured dozens of contributors by Internet illuminati; it was blogged about and cited in numerous places, including the New York Times. Search results 1 and 2 are from the Edge (where the article first appeared). Search results #3 and 4 come from NYT (no surprise), #5 comes from the Wikipedia article about Jaron Lanier (no suprise), and #6 contains the User Talk link I linked to above by Tabercil. Now it’s possible that my blogpost alone brought it good search position. But I suspect wikipedia’s privileged status on google is the reason why it received such prominence. We need to ask: does Wikipedia truly deserve the privileged search position Google gives it?