The Wikipedia page has been edited since that archive to make the reference even more blatant, but the context of the claim is the same.
All of which, in turn, comes from a New Statesman article by one author with an agenda.
And that, ladies and gents, is how you change a narrative. Put out a bullshit, "original-research" article, get it in a "reputable" publication; have it cited on Wikipedia and then have Google's AI scrape the Wiki page and present its content as undisputed "fact".
Not really anything new, tbh, We did have the same thing with the news and printed books for a while, it is just that for a moment of time the internet were free and now they will choke it like all else.
The "source" in question:
https://archive.is/sQT5s
The Wikipedia page has been edited since that archive to make the reference even more blatant, but the context of the claim is the same.
All of which, in turn, comes from a New Statesman article by one author with an agenda.
And that, ladies and gents, is how you change a narrative. Put out a bullshit, "original-research" article, get it in a "reputable" publication; have it cited on Wikipedia and then have Google's AI scrape the Wiki page and present its content as undisputed "fact".
Scary times.
Not really anything new, tbh, We did have the same thing with the news and printed books for a while, it is just that for a moment of time the internet were free and now they will choke it like all else.
They did this to us during GamerGate 1.0 too.