Ashley Rindsberg focuses on the Wikipedia/Google/New York Times/AI "knowledge cartel" and its Orwellian monopoly

PopHistorian

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
46-minute interview worth watching, IMO.

The Rubin Report recently interviewed Ashley Rindsberg, who wrote the well reviewed book The Gray Lady Winked about the New York Times as propagandists who've incorrectly reported historical facts over the past hundred years. He describes the leftist "knowledge cartel" formed by the captured and corrupted Wikipedia (mission-altered since 2017 by minions of the Soros Open Society Foundation, the Clintons, and similar ideological allies), Google, and the New York Times. He explains a bit how the symbiosis among these works and how so many other information sources are derivatives of these, with Artificial Intelligence being the most important and dangerous. He describes this large effort as being in the service of an ideological agenda, and Rubin suggests that this is, ultimately, no less than the destruction of Western civilization.

Rindsberg describes the enormous, monopolizing influence of this knowledge cartel and that it is not just a filter, and is not passive, but is actively altering history through aggressive censorship, twisting of the truth, and outright lies. He provides many examples. He explains the fading away of "fact checking" as a model (the system prefers invisibility), being superseded by consolidation and firming of cartel-selected "facts," which is enabling many world leaders to continue to escalate their "we must stop misinformation" rhetoric.

He recommends Trump to write an executive order to strike references to Wikipedia throughout the US government and ban AI training on the knowledge cartel's products, which training models currently prioritize above all other sources. There are many interesting implications about reality-creation in general.

A search of our forum for Rindsberg came up empty. If anyone happens to know more about him, feel free to share here.
 
Last edited:
His concern about Wikipedia seems to revolve around the need to do something about "Hamas propaganda." I'm not aware of this "Hamas propaganda." I am aware of Israeli propaganda and I'm also aware of people looking at Israel without Israeli propaganda glasses. Maybe someone can give me an example of Hamas propaganda? I would be very interested to see it so I can tell the difference between those promoting it and truth tellers.

Otherwise, I understand your point about the implications. I do find the E.U. sanctions against citizens far more concerning in the immediate, however.
 
His concern about Wikipedia seems to revolve around the need to do something about "Hamas propaganda."
It's incorrect that his Wikipedia concern revolves around "Hamas propaganda." It was just one of the examples he thinks he's right about, and he's not accurate (to our perspective) about everything, as no one is. That example just happens to reveal his Republican-party-line bias.
 
Back
Top Bottom