Project 3 Reflection

Gender Bias within Wikipedia Across the Globe

Project 3 was supposed to detail extensively the gender bias within Wikipedia’s platform among women of color. Most specifically, women in third-world countries are more likely to be victims of female relegation or being written out of history. Within Project 3, I covered two third-world countries, Ecuador and South Africa. In my previous project, I covered how the woman in red, Phyllis Naidoo, despite being a ground-breaking South African activist against the apartheid government, is still not recognized for her work, unlike Nelson Mandela, one of her colleagues during that same period. Using elements of Project 2, I was going to use Project 3 to emphasize that, despite the progress on female representation, outlets like Wikipedia state that’s not the entirety of the case. Looking at the platform itself, Wikipedia’s progression statement can be debatable. This is mostly due to the differences Rosalía Arteaga, Fernando Villavicencio, and Fabián Alarcón have within Wikipedia and their biographies. Both male Ecuadorian politicians outnumber the information available online for Rosalia Arteaga, both on Wikipedia and the internet overall. The purpose of my project is to reiterate this continuant issue of female suppression within history. Despite the media attention and callouts, Wikipedia and other media outlets don’t fix their issues.

Taking on this task wasn’t easy, as the intended purpose was not only to reiterate this continuance issue but also to encourage Baruch students to look at how it extends much further than just Wikipedia. Female relegation and suppression within history occur worldwide in other media and informational outlets, which are the same ones we rely on every single day. Which is why this issue was much more important to cover than it seemed. The intended audience for my project wasn’t only my classmates but also Baruch students who may stumble upon Blogs@Baruch for any type of insight. This would make my work overall much more meaningful, as whoever listens to my video and visual essay afterwards may want to learn more about the issue of female relegation and media. Coinciding with the topic of female relegation and suppression, I noted that conveying my message couldn’t be done with just a non-verbal presentation or podcast, as people needed to see the physical proof of this disparity among genders within Wikipedia. After much thought and consideration, I decided that using a video editor and maker application like Capcut was the best approach for my work. The genre for my project relied solemnly on female representation and realism, aspects the world, especially Baruch students, need to see to better the world as we continue to grow up.

To cover female relegation and suppression within history and media outlets, I had numerous outlets to express my message, yet visual and auditory means were a must. Using Capcut, I could include clips from the 1990s of Fabían Alarcón and his presidential reign while comparing how different it was for Rosalía Arteaga, who came before him. I was also able to make my transitions on points and subtopics much more easily due to the feature of visual transitions on Capcut. However, most importantly, I was able to add audio to the images and video I displayed, as that’s something I needed for those interested to understand what I was talking about. Originally, I planned to use Zoom to enact my project; however, I couldn’t place emphasis on the points I needed to with the platform. The most I could do with Zoom was hold a type of lecture presentation, which is something I did not want for my project as I wanted to captivate my audience. Thus, after trial and error with other platforms, I landed on Capcut, which gave much creativity and power to the creator.

With this project, I wanted to gain as much control as I could over the creative progress, and the project remix gave me just that. Moving away from a traditional paper, I was able to expand on female disparity and suppression as well as partially give some of my insight. I was able to not only talk about one victim of female disparity but two and show how, despite Rosalía Arteaga not being a woman in red with the level of information available on her within Wikipedia, she really is one. I was also able to give multiple examples of how Wikipedia prioritizes and favors male wiki figures over female wiki figures due to the differences in regulations for writing and the amount of dedication spent on each gender. Overall, with the multi-media project, the sky really was my limit in what I could cover, as I didn’t have to spend much time giving context due to the help of visual aids. Meaning much more emphasis was shown within the women in red, which is something I can’t do so easily on a traditional paper.

Although the multi-media project gave me much leeway in what I could do, it also had its disadvantages regarding technology issues. With the platform Capcut, some of my file images would become lower in resolution or blurry, which unfortunately I had no way of fixing. After a while, the website would also not allow me to add any more audio, so I had to constantly go back and record audio on my phone to attempt to upload it onto my computer again. Specifically, making the time frames of certain clips longer than others was difficult, as Capcut already gave designated time limits. Not to mention, the transitions, after a while, became a hassle due to the amount of constant editing I would have to do to make them look presentable and work. Aside from that, having photos on both Phyllis Naidoo and Rosalía Arteaga was hard due to the low coverage on them. If I did find any images, they often weren’t what I looked for; they were commercial photos with issues with copyright. Specifically, with Rosalía Arteaga, I faced the most conflict due to the scarce number of images there were online when she was president. Alternatively, I had to resort to YouTube to find clips and pictures of Arteaga and the other Ecuadorian politicians. After three days, my project was finally done with all the modifications needed to bring my message and vision to life.

While my vision for my project was enacted, I don’t think it’s perfect, as there is always room for improvement. This is why I wouldn’t publish or share it outside of Blogs@Baruch, as much more detail and time are needed to attempt to influence the public about its importance. My multi-media project is just some insight on the issue of female relegation within history and Wikipedia, so I wouldn’t dare share something that isn’t fully complete with the public. With my project, I was limited to five minutes, yet the topic I chose requires much more than five minutes. With that said, that is why I wouldn’t extend my project for full public consumption, as I don’t want to leave people with questions or leave crucial information out for their full comprehension.

To make my video essay fully public, I would make extensive modifications to include all the needed information and emphasis. Firstly, I would change its medium from a video-auditory essay to a full-on documentary analysis. I would also include much more videos and proof of the disparity on Wikipedia. I would add the video I cut from my video essay about how Rosalía Arteaga’s presidency was taken away from her forcibly, leading to her resignation due to her gender. I would also include much more examples where females on Wikipedia are unprioritized to direct attention to male wiki figures. Most notably, I would also include statements and statistics from professionals who note and condemn this disparity within Wikipedia. The best example I would include is how NASA astrophysicist Pamela Jones does not have a Wikipedia page due to “just being a woman with an asteroid.” Of course, this would just be the beginning of diving even deeper into female relegation, starting from the beginning of time until today. After all those revisions and modifications, I would consider sharing my piece with a wider audience.

Leave a Reply