VIDEO: Robby Soave Absurdly Claims that "Wikipedia Is Generally Pretty Accurate"

[pjcomix]

Robby Soave, one of the hosts, of "The Hill Rising" channel normally has a smarmy vibe going on just below the surface. However, on a recent discussion about Joe Rogan's interview with Dr. Peter McCullough on his podcast, Soave's smarminess went through the roof when he admitted he that didn't know much about McCullough so he consulted his Wikipedia page. This led Soave to conclude authoritatively that McCullough said some things that are supposedly not true. Soave then defended his ridiculous reliance on Wikipedia by stating that  "Wikipedia is generally pretty accurate" as if that settled the argument.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLVDLvS0Orc

[Cyber Liberty]

Wiki is useful if I want to find something out, like the population of a City, and Snopes is good if I want to find out if people were really waking up in bathtubs of ice minus a kidney.  They evolved into left-wing opinion checkers, which is totally useless.

But Wiki is an Encyclopedia (such as it is) and my High School English teacher would have rapped my knuckles raw if I ever tried to use Britannica as a source for a term paper.

[The_Reader_David]

The claim isn't absurd if one takes the entire sweep of topics covered by wikipedia:  it's generally solid on mathematics, fundamental science, ancient and medieval history, art, music, or in any portions of other areas that have not been politicized by the Left.  Once one hits the Age of Discovery, history starts going to heck, and it gets worse as one approaches the time span within the historical consciousness of the woke.  Probably most articles are sound.  It's just that it's a terrible source for anything that bears on public policy, social commentary, politics, or contemporary culture.

[Cyber Liberty]

It's just that it's a terrible source for anything that bears on public policy, social commentary, politics, or contemporary culture.

...which was exactly what the guy in the interview was trying to do.