Talk:Zero Hedge: Difference between revisions

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Zero Hedge article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Zero Hedge. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Zero Hedge at the Reference desk.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Internet Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Websites: Computing Mid‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Finance & Investment Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Economics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Internet culture Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Internet culture To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles Expand : Pick an article from here or here Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images Stubs : All stubs are located here Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}} See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention Blogging (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Blogging, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BloggingWikipedia:WikiProject BloggingTemplate:WikiProject BloggingBlogging Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Alternative views Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Politics: Libertarianism This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Libertarianism (assessed as Low-importance).

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: Kate Gibson (3 February 2020). "Twitter bans Zero Hedge after it posts coronavirus conspiracy theory". CBS News. Retrieved 4 February 2020. [.] and Daniel Ivandjiiski, a Bulgarian-born former analyst who is currently listed by Wikipedia as its main editor and publisher.

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please change 'far right' to 'conservative'. Zero Hedge is highly critical, for instance, of far right neo-liberalism, centralised decision making, governmental secrecy, censorship, coercion and war - all of which tend to be increasingly supported by mainstream news media. It seems that the verbal framework for identifying fascists is being switched. Christopher Paton (talk) 14:00, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: see the above responses to the same requests. Also see WP:RS and WP:VNT Cannolis (talk) 15:00, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Christopher Paton: please see if you can create a list of high quality sources, think things like NYT, washingtonpost, sf chronicle, bloomberg, wsj, etc that use conservative instead of far right. We can then look at that and compare it to those using far right. We need to see some sources using conservative to create some balance (if it exists). Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 03:15, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, rather than ascribing Delphic authority to the media sources that you quote, it would be more rational and surely more conventional to go through a checklist of the norms that far-right organisations or publications are known for and see if they match up with Zero Hedge. If that process was fairly applied, I believe not only that ZH would be exonerated of far-rightness, but also that your oracles would find themselves in the dock. Christopher Paton (talk) 19:41, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That would be an exercise in forbidden original research where editors' opinions and interpretations take precedence over what RS say. Our job is to document the latter. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 20:08, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know what Delphic Authority is, but please find high quality WP:RS, that is how we do things at wikipedia. It is indeed restritive, but that is how it works. Have a look at the list here at WP:RSP to get an idea of what is good to use and what isnt. If you can find sources that are not referring to the article subject as far right, we can include that per WP:NPOV. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 08:55, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The only reason Zero Hedge has been labelled 'far right', according to the 'reliable sources' listed, is because one or more articles it carried speculated on the possibility that Covid-19 may have been generated in a Chinese lab. At the time, this alone was enough to get ZH condemned as racist (no other empirical evidence was cited), but six months or so later, these same sources were publicly speculating on the exact same possibility. I have been advised to sift through these and similar media publications to see whether they have retracted their slur (or, perhaps, admitted to being themselves 'far right'), but consider that to be an exercise in futility. Surely, it's more reasonable and rational to check the attribution against conventional definitions rather than treat mainstream media as some kind of ultimate authority. Do that and you will find that ZH does not conform to any known definition of 'far right' - not any dictionary definition, nor indeed Wikipedia's own definition. Christopher Paton (talk) 20:15, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While Zerohedge received a lot of press labeling it far-right because of Covid-19 conspiracies, they are also labeled as far-right in the current citations about other topics (Charlottesville Car Attack, Black Lives Matter protests conspiracies, hoax about fines for taking a shower and doing laundry at the same time). Outside of the current citations, they've also been labeled as far-right in articles about spreading Chinese and Russian propaganda. It's hard to make a case for removing "far-right" when that description is used nearly every time they come up in reliable sources. Like Valjean said a few weeks ago, doing our own analysis and research on the meaning of "far-right" and whether Zerohedge meets that definition would be original research. Even if media sources are misrepresenting Zerohedge, Wikipedia isn't the place to right great wrongs. Politanvm ^talk 20:56, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is isn't about righting great wrongs but about misinformation/disinformation and, beyond that, censorship.

It doesn't take any analysis or research. If Wikipedia's article on what 'far-right' means is correct, the labelling of ZH as 'far-right' is not. One or the other is false and should be corrected.

And, with all due respect, I have to take issue with what you regard as 'reliable sources'. These sources also, like ZH, published what you label 'Covid-19 conspiracies'. And they also spread disinformation, for instance, about Iraq's WMDs.

Then, taking your links in turn, the first labels ZH as 'far-right' on the grounds that some views on its comments pages were far-right. If that is the qualifying bar, then every media publication on the planet would be guilty.

The second derived from an allegation by a shady Blairite 'charity' that is most notable for discrediting British socialism.

The third didn't look serious enough to go through the paywall. The fourth might be propaganda or might not: the US has a long, extremely well documented record of hijacking protests in foreign countries. (Pls check US national archives). And the fifth is from VoiceOfAmerica - itself an active well-known propagandist.

These do not qualify as 'reliable sources'.

Moreover, mis-characterising ZH as 'far-right' is an oblique form of censorship, because most people (who are not) will be repelled by the term. And it further undermines the reputation of Wikipedia as a reliable source of information.

The issue of Wikipedia's prioritising the unsupported assertions of a corporate media echo-chamber over independents is another issue that needs addressing on another day.

Christopher Paton (talk) 13:40, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussing your opinion of something will not bring change. Please do the work to create a list of WP:RS that show that ZH is also referred to as libertarian in the sources. If it is balance, then we can make a change. If Editors refuse to make the change, we can run an WP:RFC. But discussing our opinions here wont bring any change. You can add those sources here to this talk page, and put in the exact text from the source here (no need the who sentence, maybe a word or three). Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 02:42, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, can we get an edit on what side Zero-Hedge is on? I've always referred to ZeroHedge as being on the left, a "Left-Wing"? Many of the articles they write about also tell this.. 203.220.169.52 (talk) 21:52, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]