Jump to content

Talk:Katherine Maher

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2601:19e:427e:5bb0:a851:8803:b06b:49d1 (talk) at 15:49, 21 April 2024 (Need to add “Political Views” section.: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Resigned from FAPB

Hiya, it's Katherine, subject of the article. Just wanted to note I am no longer on the State Department FAPB, effective Jan 23rd: I resigned in order to accept the NPR CEO designee role. Not sure that will be reported out somewhere, so may not have an appropriate source to cite, but thought I'd flag it. Maherkr (talk) 15:58, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Need to add “Political Views” section.

Her support of Democrats is well-documented, as is her support of the 2020 riots. SoulAtHazard (talk) 10:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{{sofixit}}? but sounds like you have some biases of your own. Jeremyb (talk) 19:55, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
can you try to collect some citations . let's make sure they are well sourced and relevant to her career. Here are a couple citations to start with [1][2] Tonymetz 💬 19:22, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As "Elon Musk" has a prominent section of "Personal views and Twitter usage," you'd think this entry has a similar section, particularly given her career has been largely funded by public money (at least from Wikipedia part), and even more so as NPR CEO. But given the way of Wikipedia led by this "outstanding" CEO for its "free and open" policy, let's wait and see if any such thing would be ever added to this entry. Tuskla (talk) 22:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
“Our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that’s getting in the way of finding common ground.” From her ted talk. Not sure if that go towards politics or mental health. SoulAtHazard (talk) 15:02, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Very true. Katherine Maher is also against the idea of an objective truth, against a free and open Internet, and sees the First Amendment as an impediment to censorship, see here[3], here[4],
and here[5]
She even says explicitly that she worked with governments to suppress “misinformation” on Wikipedia.
And yet none of this is featured on this article. Gatekeeping and protecting the former CEO of Wikimedia seems to be the mission of some very powerful people here.
2601:19E:427E:5BB0:A851:8803:B06B:49D1 (talk) 15:49, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quite a promotional/CV-like article

This article feels quite promotional and written like her CV?

For example at age 25 (i.e. 2007) she joins UNICEF where She worked to promote the use of technology to improve people's lives. She traveled extensively to work on issues related to maternal health, HIV/AIDS prevention, and youth participation in technology. That is a very embellished job description for a 25-year old UNICEF employee? 22:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC) Aszx5000 (talk) 22:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yup and the article keeps crediting her for things that can’t be directly attributed to her. 2600:1001:A110:146C:A409:2D61:303D:31CD (talk) 23:19, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
which part are you referring to? I added stuff recently to flesh out her role at Wikipedia a bit more. I'm surprised it's so sparse. Tonymetz 💬 19:58, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree this article reads like a PR piece and is missing a lot of content. let's improve it Tonymetz 💬 19:59, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article is clearly PR written. I believe it warrants taking a look at the edits, frequency, and IPs used. This is very much astroturfed.
Some of the "accomplishemnts", like membership in the Oxford Union when Mrs. Maher only participated in one exchange is resune embellishment. Mrs. Maher didn't even attent Oxford. There is undue weight to what amounts to an extended CV.
Moreover, why is this article still missing the explosive left-wing bias in her work and editorial content? Is WP protecting her due to her personal relationship with Jimbo Wales (as proudly showcased in pictures in this article)?
Here are some very relevant, recent sources talking about her left-wing bias and her suspending award-winning journalist Uri Berliner for calling her out. None of this is shown here on this protected and carefully manicured article.
Sources to consider:NYT[6], NYT[7], NYT[8], NPR[9], USA Today[10], RCP[11]
Note: I am not including the many other relevant and valid sources from Fox, NYPost, etc since they are not allowed by WP Editors. This being a "protected" and manicured article, I am just sending a curated list of "allowed" sources.
2601:19E:427E:5BB0:D00D:73CE:7CD8:2141 (talk) 04:00, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just added stuff and I’m a normal bloke. I recommend fixing it . Just BEBOLD and add quality content that you think is DUE
If there is a conspiracy then you can raise a dispute here or escalate it Tonymetz 💬 16:38, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree that this article reads like a PR piece and is missing a lot of content, as Tonymetz put it. Also, per another note here above, there needs to be more coverage on her views, as shown in the aforementioned sources. Al83tito (talk) 18:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Background expository

“Quotations from Chairman Maher”

https://www.city-journal.org/article/quotations-from-chairman-maher

“NPR’s new CEO exemplifies the ideological capture of America’s institutions.”

‘As CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation, Maher made censorship a critical part of her policy, under the guise of fighting “disinformation.” In a speech to the Atlantic Council, an organization with extensive ties to U.S. intelligence services, she explained that she “took a very active approach to disinformation,” coordinated censorship “through conversations with government,” and suppressed dissenting opinions related to the pandemic and the 2020 election.’ 89.240.195.132 (talk) 22:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Was there a question here? cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 23:05, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up

Maher has a bit of media coverage atm, [12] from The Federalist. The WP-article may get some attention because of it. Afaict, "It was under Maher’s tenure that Wikipedia tried to eliminate The Federalist’s online entry." is incorrect. For the interested, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thefederalist.com, it's long. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for raising. I also opened a Village Pump(WMF) request for PR attention on the controversy. Tonymetz 💬 17:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The wording is technically true, but not broadly. Maher was Chief Comms officer from Apr 2014 to Mar 2016; The article was up for deletion in Sep 2014; and all content of Wikipedia is the sum of its users, so 'it was under Maher's tenure' that "Wikipedia" 'tried to eliminate The Federalist's online entry'. Sort of falls into the synthesis arguments the occur here on the regular. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 19:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, IMO per the "Maher served as CEO of Wikimedia Foundation from March 2016 to April 2021 ... It was under Maher’s tenure that Wikipedia tried to eliminate..." wording, they don't get it right enough. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Maher piece

As per [13] and others, Bill Maher ran a deep piece on Katherine Maher (no relation) yesterday where he pointed out that under Maher's tenure at NPR "...of the 87 people working in editorial positions there, 87 are Democrats. Even if you're a Democrat, you can't think this is good." Moreover, "Maher then knocked his "namesake" NPR CEO for her woke social media posts."

Additionally, "She's a ‘Portlandia’ character," Maher quipped. "She says things like ‘I mean, sure, looting is counterproductive. But it’s founded on treating people's ancestors as private property.' I mean, c'mon man. A long time ago. She says 'I suffer with cis-White mobility privilege.' I mean it's kind of White woman who says she's Beyoncé's spirit animal."

Some of this should be featured in this still very manicured article. It hurts WP's neutrality to have this not be covered. There seems to be strong inaction from some very active in adjacent topics admins here. It seems her tenure at Wikimedia insulates her from any criticism. 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:AECF:C89:3304:EF6 (talk) 05:26, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the "democrat" thing is not outlandish to mention, in a "Bill Maher said" form, we can cite his show (where I assume he said it). However, Bill Maher is among other things a comedian. Was he entirely right/serious or was he (only) being funny? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:29, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He was being very serious. It was a longer piece and not just a quip. Here's another source [14].
2601:19E:427E:5BB0:A851:8803:B06B:49D1 (talk) 14:47, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Slightly off-topic, but this by The Hill may be a usable source, I haven't watched it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:04, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a great source direct from The Hill! Awesome find that should be reflected on this carefully manicured article.
2601:19E:427E:5BB0:A851:8803:B06B:49D1 (talk) 14:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP co-founder calls for Katherine Maher's firing

Yet again, very relevant news regarding this very well-kept and majoritly primary sourced article that are not being included here. This article and its extended protection while refusing to edit it seems to be a very high level of gatekeeping to protect Katherine Maher due to her very partisan policies.

Here [15] and here [16] we see Larry Sanger, WP co-founder, stating "NPR should let her go right away". Further explaining that "It is getting to the point where you can’t accuse people like Katherine Maher of hypocrisy anymore because they’re not being hypocritical. They’re actually saying it out loud: “We don’t really believe in this freedom stuff anyway.”

2601:19E:427E:5BB0:A851:8803:B06B:49D1 (talk) 14:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]