NYPD Caught Editing Wikipedia Articles on Police Brutality

Sadly, I suppose it should come as no surprise that the NYPD is engaging in spin, propaganda and shill tactics:

gizmodo.com...

www.capitalnewyork.com...

Computers operating on the New York Police Department’s computer network at its 1 Police Plaza headquarters have been used to alter Wikipedia pages containing details of alleged police brutality, a review by Capital has revealed.

“The matter is under internal review,” an NYPD spokeswoman, Det. Cheryl Crispin, wrote in an email to Capital after examples of the changes were presented to the NYPD.

The edits and changes were linked to the NYPD through a series of Internet Protocol addresses, or IP addresses, which can be publicly tracked by various websites.

It will be interesting to see if the internal "investigation" reveals if this was a sanctioned, organized effort or someone was acting unilaterally and unofficially on the public dime.

One has to think someone gave this effort a stamp of approval since it's specific to the NYPDs most notorious instances of alleged police brutality. And it's so ironic juxtaposed with the comments today by the St. Louis County Sheriff that "war has been declared on police". Information and/or propaganda is just as much a tool of war as bullets.

Given all the instances of brutality and dead citizens following an interaction with LEOs and now this proof of propaganda efforts, it kind of feels like the other way around...that there is a war on citizens and their civil rights.

Citation needed.

a reply to: Aleister

There is one at the Gizmodo link.

a reply to: kosmicjack

No, that wasn't a comment on your OP, it was an insider-Wikipedia joke. Some people always go around putting up 'Citation needed' tags when they don't like something or want someone to prove something.

a reply to: Aleister

LoL! I thought so but wasn't sure. There was a nagging doubt that wondered if you wanted to know the exact edit.

I suspect many police departments have been doing this sort of thing for awhile, but it's nice to have confirmation. Well, not really 'nice', given the circumstances, but, uh, yeah.....

Can't anybody edit any wiki page? So the police edit articles about police. People who dislike the police edit them back. And the tug of war continues. Why does this surprise anybody? Why is anybody shocked by it? Both sides in any issue put out propaganda.

For general reading: fivethirtyeight.com...

I found 2, 6, and 10 to be particularly worrisome. Just think of who's editing #2!

I'm sure it was "condoned" by the higher-ups, but it'll be blamed on a "rouge" individual acting on his own. That's typically how these things go down. I just wonder how they convinced a person to take the fall for it.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Tax payers don't fund LEO to fight misconceptions, we pay to fight crime.

a reply to: kosmicjack

Taxpayers pay the guys who update official police Twitter accounts. Taxpayers pay the public information officer. Taxpayers pay the guy who updates the department's facebook page.

If it's found that the edits contained factual errors or misrepresentations then by all means, nail whomever it was that made the edits. But I'm not going to crucify NYPD for doing something that literally countless other entities also do.

a reply to: Shamrock6

One could argue that the PIO, Twitter and FB page serve a real-time interest for public safety....rewriting or spinning failures of the past doesn't.

a reply to: kosmicjack

Again, depends on what the edits were. Were they correcting falsehoods? Then I would say that's pretty much right in a PIO's wheelhouse.

Were they spreading falsehoods? Then, again, nail whomever made the edit.

Did anyone else know you can download Wikipedia? I have all of Wikipedia on my iPhone...

Of course due to the nature of *ahem* edits, the Wikipedia file changes and you have to download a newer one.

It's pretty cool though to have all of Wikipedia on your phone, off-line. In a power outage and no Wifi I could still use Wikipedia with a solar charger. A lot of the images have been scaled down, but it's all there.

a reply to: kosmicjack

Follow up: you and I both know that there are many people out there, and here on ATS, that would view a department posting about their annual shop with a cop as nothing more than propoganda. That kind of post isn't germane to public safety, ergo it must be propoganda.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Did you see that they also made edits about Chumbawumba? LoL!

Working hard.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Were they spreading falsehoods? Then, again, nail whomever made the edit.

I think a couple of them were sort of not even iffy, they converted some people into "armed" that were known not to be.

It's NYPD though. Given a history of honor enhancing events like Abner Louima, they ought to just shut up, IMHO.

I think if you rolled up NYPD, LAPD, NOPD, maybe a half dozen others and dropped them into the middle of the Atlantic about 99% of the things I'd like to whack cops over the head with a lead pipe for would go away. I'm not sure how you can be a NYPD cop and hold your head up, personally.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: Shamrock6

Did you see that they also made edits about Chumbawumba? LoL!

Working hard.

Treacherous bastards. I LIKE Chumbawumba. Being cops, they probably like rap music.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
Sadly, I suppose it should come as no surprise that the NYPD is engaging in spin, propaganda and shill tactics:

gizmodo.com...

www.capitalnewyork.com...

Computers operating on the New York Police Department’s computer network at its 1 Police Plaza headquarters have been used to alter Wikipedia pages containing details of alleged police brutality, a review by Capital has revealed.

“The matter is under internal review,” an NYPD spokeswoman, Det. Cheryl Crispin, wrote in an email to Capital after examples of the changes were presented to the NYPD.

The edits and changes were linked to the NYPD through a series of Internet Protocol addresses, or IP addresses, which can be publicly tracked by various websites.

It will be interesting to see if the internal "investigation" reveals if this was a sanctioned, organized effort or someone was acting unilaterally and unofficially on the public dime.

One has to think someone gave this effort a stamp of approval since it's specific to the NYPDs most notorious instances of alleged police brutality. And it's so ironic juxtaposed with the comments today by the St. Louis County Sheriff that "war has been declared on police". Information and/or propaganda is just as much a tool of war as bullets.

Given all the instances of brutality and dead citizens following an interaction with LEOs and now this proof of propaganda efforts, it kind of feels like the other way around...that there is a war on citizens and their civil rights.

Man, let me be the first to give you a citation of the right kind.
Everyone fecks about with Wiki for no good reason, trying to rewrite history. The CIA have dunnit and the rest of that motley crew, officialdom at its worst in this case, and I don't need to bet you that it is officialdom who are the worst offenders by a huge margin, with the legal eagles a close second. But, what is more to the point, it is these low-lifes who are taking over the internet slowly but surely for their thirty pieces of silver.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: kosmicjack

That kind of post isn't germane to public safety, ergo it must be propoganda.

Piffle! I miss few opportunities to state my feelings about LEOs, but you're at your best during Christmas cop shopping - I used to be a Jaycee along with other things, and we sponsored that every year. Now, if you could just remember we're ALL those kids when you look at us.

a reply to: kosmicjack

Maybe you should start by saying that, "Well, Wiki really is made that way and certain countries, factors of life and even individuals, make a habit of altering each others materials posted to the site because they can."

Then you could add that all of that fooling and fudging with the material on Wiki should mean to all of us that you should not really accept any of it as the true gospel of the internet. I never use the site except for a quick lookup for basic facts. Police shootings are not one of those issues that you can quantify by deaths and bullets used. The social aspects and dynamics are so tremendous in this one single aspect of modern life that there is no one simple answer--at least not from who ever gets the screen at Wike. And it is not impartial, you know.