Jump to content

User:Crotalus horridus/Problems with Zombietime image

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Crotalus horridus (talk | contribs) at 00:56, 14 January 2008 (Neutral point of view: Klug ref). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

There has been a great deal of controversy, particularly on Talk:New antisemitism, regarding the inclusion of a photograph allegedly taken at a San Francisco anti-war rally in 2003.

Background

The image was taken by "zombie," the pseudonymous author of a Web site called Zombietime. There has been some controversy as to the exact nature of this material. According to the author, "Zombietime is not a blog. It is simply a Web site."[1] Nonetheless, it has been described in reliable sources as a blog.[2][3][4]

One thing, however, is clear: Zombietime is not a reliable source according to Wikipedia standards. The Wikipedia policy on verifiability states that "self-published books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, forum postings, and similar sources are largely not acceptable." Such sources may only be used in a few carefully delimited circumstances, none of which apply to this image. Whether or not it is a blog, Zombietime is unquestionably self-published.

According to its description page, the image in question was uploaded to Wikipedia on August 30, 2006. It is currently used in three articles: New antisemitism, Anti-globalization and antisemitism, and Zombietime. In all three articles, it has been prominently placed in the lead.

The image is deployed under a claim of fair use. Although "zombie" has given authorization for his photograph to be used under a CC-BY license, the photograph is a derivative work of the poster which comprises the majority of the frame. The artist who drew the poster has not provided a valid free license for the image contained therein. Although the artist's name is not specified on the image description page, a statement says that it is "available upon request."

The inclusion of this image has been controversial, with some users opposing its inclusion while others just as adamantly defend it. The opposition case was summed up pithily by G-Dett, who described the photograph as "a crazy image of Jewish devils torching the globe — an image whose economy of distribution (before Wikipedia got its hands on it) consisted of having been designed by one crank, held aloft by a second, and photographed by a third."[5]

Problems with the image

The inclusion of the Zombietime image, especially on the New antisemitism article, is highly problematic. Our three core content policies are neutral point of view, verifiability, and no original research. The current use of the Zombietime photograph doesn't just violate one of these principles; it violates all three.

Neutral point of view

The Wikimedia Foundation mandates "neutral point of view as the guiding editorial principle."[6] According to the policy page, "We are supposed to "assert facts, including facts about opinions — but do not assert the opinions themselves." We are also required to avoid giving undue weight to fringe and minority views. Moreover, "Undue weight applies to more than just viewpoints."

Placing the Zombietime photograph in the lead of New antisemitism, in particular, violates the neutrality policy. As discussed in that article, the very existence of "new antisemitism" as a real phenomenon is disputed by several reliable sources. Norman Finkelstein, in particular, has written that the concept is simply a shield to "immunize Israel against criticism."[7] Brian Klug argues that "new antisemitism" is actually a conflation of several different phenomena, that the use of the term is unhelpful, and that, as a result of this discourse, "legitimate moral and political views about Israel and Zionism" have been "branded anti-Semitic."[8]

References

  1. ^ zombie (2006-08-23). "The Red Cross Ambulance Incident". Zombietime. Retrieved 2008-01-13. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  2. ^ Dodd, Mark (2006-08-31). "Downer blogged down on hoax". The Australian. Retrieved 2008-01-13. He based his charge on an account in the anonymous blog zombietime.com. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  3. ^ Lucchino, Jennifer (2005-09-15). "Design Unveiled for Shanksville, PA's Flight 93 Memorial". Architectural Record. Retrieved 2008-01-13. As noted on the conservative blog Zombietime... {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  4. ^ Chandler, Jo (2006-09-02). "Right-wing 'Zombie' taunts foes on the web". The Age. Retrieved 2008-01-13. He (zombie) claims to be a 'photoblogger' who lives in San Francisco. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  5. ^ G-Dett (2008-01-06). "Suggestion for moving forward". Wikipedia. Retrieved 2008-01-13. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  6. ^ Various authors. "Meta: Foundation issues". Wikimedia Meta-Wiki. Retrieved 2008-01-13. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  7. ^ Finkelstein, Norman (2005). Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History. University of California Press. p. 21-22. ISBN 0520245989. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)
  8. ^ Klug, Brian (2006-03-17). "In search of clarity: Brian Klug defines anti-Semitism". Catalyst Forum. Retrieved 2008-01-13. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)