Changes

A more recent example of a failure in ethical accountability is the relationship between the non-profit [[Directory:Wikimedia Foundation|Wikimedia Foundation]] and the privately-held for-profit corporation [[Directory:Wikia|Wikia, Inc.]]  Wikia, co-founded by Jimmy Wales and capitalized by Amazon (reportedly $10 million), the Bessemer Partners, Omidyar Network, and other corporate sponsors, makes money off the back of the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation and its projects. How? Wikipedia is a commercial traffic engine.  As of December 2008, there are over [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:LinkSearch&limit=5000&offset=10000&target=http%3A%2F%2F*.wikia.com 14,300 external links] from Wikipedia to Wales' Wikia.com sites, which are funded by Google AdSense revenues.  It is also interesting that there are [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:LinkSearch&limit=5000&offset=40000&target=http%3A%2F%2F*.amazon.com over 43,000 links] to Amazon's retail site from the supposedly non-profit Wikipedia site.  The popular movie site IMDB.com is owned by Amazon, and one can buy Amazon products directly from IMDB pages.  There are [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:LinkSearch&limit=5000&offset=170000&target=http%3A%2F%2F*.IMDB.com nearly 174,000 links to Amazon's IMDB site] from Wikipedia.  It is no surprise that Amazon particularly wished to invest in Wikia, Inc.  Its co-founder makes sure that the external linking environment on Wikipedia is hospitable for the Amazon link spamming machine.

A more recent example of a failure in ethical accountability is the relationship between the non-profit [[Directory:Wikimedia Foundation|Wikimedia Foundation]] and the privately-held for-profit corporation [[Directory:Wikia|Wikia, Inc.]]  Wikia, co-founded by Jimmy Wales and capitalized by Amazon (reportedly $10 million), the Bessemer Partners, Omidyar Network, and other corporate sponsors, makes money off the back of the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation and its projects. How? Wikipedia is a commercial traffic engine.  As of December 2008, there are over [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:LinkSearch&limit=5000&offset=10000&target=http%3A%2F%2F*.wikia.com 14,300 external links] from Wikipedia to Wales' Wikia.com sites, which are funded by Google AdSense revenues.  It is also interesting that there are [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:LinkSearch&limit=5000&offset=40000&target=http%3A%2F%2F*.amazon.com over 43,000 links] to Amazon's retail site from the supposedly non-profit Wikipedia site.  The popular movie site IMDB.com is owned by Amazon, and one can buy Amazon products directly from IMDB pages.  There are [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:LinkSearch&limit=5000&offset=170000&target=http%3A%2F%2F*.IMDB.com nearly 174,000 links to Amazon's IMDB site] from Wikipedia.  It is no surprise that Amazon particularly wished to invest in Wikia, Inc.  Its co-founder makes sure that the external linking environment on Wikipedia is hospitable for the Amazon link spamming machine.

Further, if you go to Jimmy Wales' "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales talk page]" on Wikipedia, and you ask him whether he feels that this obscene number of links to his for-profit site and those of his investors might be a ''conflict of interest'' or ''self-dealing'', Jimbo won't even have time to respond.  One or two of his sycophants will fairly promptly dismiss or erase your message; and if you try one more time to ask this question, you're likely to get blocked from editing Wikipedia altogether.  This is an example of a breakdown in ethical accountability.  In fact, the unethical practice of self-dealing is institutionalized at the Wikimedia Foundation.

Further, if you go to Jimmy Wales' "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales talk page]" on Wikipedia, and you ask him whether he feels that this obscene number of links to his for-profit site and those of his investors might be a ''conflict of interest'' or ''self-dealing'', Jimbo won't even have time to respond.  One or two of his sycophants will fairly promptly dismiss or erase your message; and if you try one more time to ask this question, you're likely to get blocked from editing Wikipedia altogether.  This is an example of a breakdown in ethical accountability.  In fact, the unethical practice of self-dealing is institutionalized at the Wikimedia Foundation.  

 

If these facts are not enough to convince that money finds its way through the back door to Wikia, Inc., then perhaps a look [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2009-January/049340.html at the front door] is in order.  The Wikimedia Foundation announced in January 2009 that it would begin paying rent to Wikia, Inc. on a monthly basis, using tax-advantaged funds from the Ruth and Frank Stanton Fund.  Then, in August 2009, Matt Halprin, [http://www.omidyar.com/team/matt-halprin  Partner of the Omidyar Network], was asked to join the Wikimedia Foundation board of trustees.  Halprin is charged with an Omidyar team that "pursues investments in Social Media", and Omidyar invested part of $4 million into Wikia, Inc. in 2006.  So, he's almost undoubtedly on top of the Wikia return on investment.  Again, it is an utter failure of ethical accountability to invite a new non-profit board member who is a partner at a firm that invested some portion of $4 million into a privately-held firm of the "Emeritus Chair" of the Wikimedia Foundation.

If these facts are not enough to convince that money finds its way through the back door to Wikia, Inc., then perhaps a look [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2009-January/049340.html at the front door] is in order.  The Wikimedia Foundation announced in January 2009 that it would begin paying rent to Wikia, Inc. on a monthly basis, using tax-advantaged funds from the Ruth and Frank Stanton Fund.  Then, in August 2009, Matt Halprin, [http://www.omidyar.com/team/matt-halprin  Partner of the Omidyar Network], was asked to join the Wikimedia Foundation board of trustees.  Halprin is charged with an Omidyar team that "pursues investments in Social Media", and Omidyar invested part of $4 million into Wikia, Inc. in 2006.  So, he's almost undoubtedly on top of the Wikia return on investment.  Again, it is an utter failure of ethical accountability to invite a new non-profit board member who is a partner at a firm that invested some portion of $4 million into a privately-held firm of the "Emeritus Chair" of the Wikimedia Foundation.