In July 2024, ANI filed a lawsuit against Wikimedia Foundation in the Delhi High Court — claiming to have been defamed in its article on Wikipedia — and sought ₹2 crore (US$240,000) in damages. At the time of the suit’s filing, the Wikipedia article about ANI said the news agency had “been accused of having served as a propaganda tool for the incumbent central government, distributing materials from a vast network of fake news websites, and misreporting events on multiple occasions”. The filing accused Wikipedia of publishing “false and defamatory content with the malicious intent of tarnishing the news agency’s reputation, and aimed to discredit its goodwill”.
On 5 September, the Court threatened to hold Wikimedia guilty of contempt for failing to disclose information about the editors who had made changes to the article and warned that Wikipedia might be blocked in India upon further non-compliance. The judge on the case stated “If you don’t like India, please don’t work in India… We will ask government to block your site”. In response, Wikimedia emphasized that the information in the article was supported by multiple reliable secondary sources. Justice Manmohan said “I think nothing can be worse for a news agency than to be called a puppet of an intelligence agency, stooge of the government. If that is true, the credibility goes.”
On 21 October, the Wikimedia Foundation suspended access to the article for Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation due to an order from the court.
deleted by creator
I think this is confusing so tried to understand it and here is what I understand. The Wikipedia page for Asian News International is up. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International And it says things like ANI is the “mouthpiece” of the Indian government. There is a section about the lawsuit and it quotes what ANI didn’t like about it. This is what the lawsuit was first about, but this page and the discussion page are still up as of 27 Oct 2024. The page can’t be modified and given what you can see it looks like there was some editing wars that happened before editing was taken away.
Now about https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International_vs._Wikimedia_Foundation The article and discussion page that was taken down is about the ongoing lawsuit. It been replaced with a page saying it was taken down and a link to the actual lawsuit. Which I suggest people read. I do think the Indian government has a point if you read the lawsuit. This is a ongoing lawsuit and the page taken down had info on it and a discussion page where people were talking about the ongoing lawsuit. The lawsuit says that this “…Complicates and compounds the issue at hand.” And if you know anything about lawsuits the first thing people do or are told to do is to shut up about it. This page was really the opposite. I can see why Wikimedia complied.
That the lawsuit happened in the first place is disturbing. But I think Wikimedia replacement page for the ongoing lawsuit is not surprising and reasonable. If they had taken down the main article, now that would be disturbing.
I do think the Indian government has a point if you read the lawsuit. This is a ongoing lawsuit and the page taken down had info on it and a discussion page where people were talking about the ongoing lawsuit. The lawsuit says that this “…Complicates and compounds the issue at hand.”
Hard disagree. Ongoing lawsuits often have complicated issues, but are nonetheless topics of public concern. It’s sometimes inconvenient for governments and large corporations to have the public aware of the lawsuit and the underlying facts and issues, but that’s no reason to impose a gag order.
Frankly, whenever I hear a court give vague rationales like “complicates the issues,” I assume they judge just doesn’t like the criticism. That’s what it sounds like here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International_vs._Wikimedia_Foundation
wtf???
Why would they even bother to comply, India has no jurisdiction. Plenty of countries have banned wikipedia pages and the entire site before, why did wikimedia have to go out of their way to do it for them globally?
The current Indian government has prosecuted or detained employees of foreign companies in the past for actions taken by the company. There is a real risk here.
can’t ban pages anymore with https, and while they don’t want to be lumped in with the authoritarian states that ban all on Wikipedia, they are like them at heart
Right! It’s so suspicious they did it worldwide.
Shame on Wikipedia for taking down the article!
which article did they take down? As other posters have noted the ANI page is still up, they took down the wiki page for the ongoing lawsuit which is common practice for.lawsuits.
Fuck the Indian state and its enablers.
Yeah. India is pretty much a piece of shit country. Their government seems really corrupt and they pollute like mad while they still have so much of their busted caste system in place. All while being racist as hell.
Blocking an article worldwide based on the orders of a single oppressive regime? That settles it, Wikipedia is no longer worth donating to, since they’ve proven they’re willing to bow to this type of thing rather than stand behind the truth.
What’s been blocked? Looks like just the ANI vs Wikipedia, but I don’t think that’s abnormal for an ongoing lawsuit. The ANI page is still up
deleted by creator
Me, viewing banned Wikipedia articles:
I don’t know what exactly is blocked worldwde, but in the frenche Wikipedia here, while the description is short, it’s here and extremely explicit:
[ANI] est pointée comme une « fabrique de fake news », un canal de désinformation proche du gouvernement indien4, dont les articles citent pour décrédibiliser les rivaux du pays de prétendus experts inventés de toutes pièces in other words, ‘{the ANI news agency] is considered a fake news factory and a deinformation channel close to the government whose papers use to quote invented fake experts to de-credibilize rival countries’ Couldn’t be clearer (and unbanned)…
This is the blocked article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International_vs._Wikimedia_Foundation (https://archive.is/ZmGGk)
Here’s an archived version of it before getting blocked: https://archive.is/dNTEl
from that page i can switch to English ☞ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International
In July 2024, ANI filed a lawsuit against Wikimedia Foundation in the Delhi High Court — claiming to have been defamed in its article on Wikipedia — and sought ₹2 crore (US$240,000) in damages. At the time of the suit’s filing, the Wikipedia article about ANI said the news agency had “been accused of having served as a propaganda tool for the incumbent central government, distributing materials from a vast network of fake news websites, and misreporting events on multiple occasions”. The filing accused Wikipedia of publishing “false and defamatory content with the malicious intent of tarnishing the news agency’s reputation, and aimed to discredit its goodwill”.
On 5 September, the Court threatened to hold Wikimedia guilty of contempt for failing to disclose information about the editors who had made changes to the article and warned that Wikipedia might be blocked in India upon further non-compliance. The judge on the case stated “If you don’t like India, please don’t work in India… We will ask government to block your site”. In response, Wikimedia emphasized that the information in the article was supported by multiple reliable secondary sources. Justice Manmohan said “I think nothing can be worse for a news agency than to be called a puppet of an intelligence agency, stooge of the government. If that is true, the credibility goes.”
On 21 October, the Wikimedia Foundation suspended access to the article for Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation due to an order from the court.
which is what’s quoted by OP
Damn corps always getting away with stuff. They should fine them as a percentage of profit ….😉
you did not leave soace betweenthe quote and your message after it, and clients see it as a whole quote
You mean between the French article and the English comment? :)
I think nothing can be worse for a news agency than to be called a puppet of an intelligence agency, stooge of the government. If that is true, the credibility goes
So close and yet still missing the point. It’s not that wikipedia says it, it’s that it’s the truth, and we can’t have website showing true facts, something this judge no doubt understands very well (or at least his wallet does)
Frack all of these people, I’m so tired about a few authoritarian narcissists making the world a shit show.
I would expect something like this from my mother country sooner than India. Surprised but not that surprised. The precedent being set is concerning.
The precedent was years ago with Facebook and WhatsApp blocking alleged anti government messages (which the court branded as anti-nation, sedition). Last year the BBC documentary about Modi and alleged fascism was world news and led to the departure of BBC from India. The problem is that the world sees India as an emerging market where in fact it is a fascist country in the making.
Fuck the Indian regime.
Fuck all abusive government
Feels like that’s kind of most of them right now.
Doesn’t it though? A relative handful of people just fucking shit up for everyone on earth.
Article is specifically about India
Fuck all abusive government.
This article is specifically about India, going All Lives Matter just seems strange here.
Comparing the censorship of a Wikipedia article to the treatment of black people is shameful. You’re way off base.
Fuck me.
… please?
Don’t threaten me with a good time.
This right here. Let’s not single out India, there’s a lot of shitheel governments to go around.
The article is about India.
It’s the country named in the article lmao
modi modi modi modi modi modi modi modi modi modi modi modi
Hahaha go ahead and block it you dumb fucks, only your citizenry will suffer.
if this 👇 happened in France, than of course that 👆 can happen in India
The DCRI summoned a Wikipedia volunteer in their offices on April 4th [2013]. This volunteer, which was one of those having access to the tools that allow the deletion of pages, was forced to delete the article while in the DCRI offices, on the understanding that he would have been held in custody and prosecuted if he did not comply. Under pressure, he had no other choice than to delete the article, despite explaining to the DCRI this is not how Wikipedia works. He warned the other sysops that trying to undelete the article would engage their responsibility before the law. This volunteer had no link with that article, having never edited it and not even knowing of its existence before entering the DCRI offices. He was chosen and summoned because he was easily identifiable, given his regular promotional actions of Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects in France.
Fake news got its feelz hurt
This is pretty big news, I would think it would be relevant in way more than just one article, time to do some updating.
