|Esther Hicks 2009 / Flickr|
Esther Hicks Versus Wikipedia
The trustworthiness of Wikipedia as a resource for objective information has been questioned, almost since the online encyclopedia’s invention. Their page devoted to Esther Hicks is a yummy banquet for doubters of the online encyclopedia’s reliability.
Recently, news stories exposed tactics used by some of Wikipedia’s volunteer contributors that boost celebrity standings by messing with history as if rewriting a problematic novel.
None of the so-called volunteers were paid by Wikipedia. They were paid by the public relations firms the celebrities hired to spruce up their images.
When I read that story, I remembered how sad it was to see how badly the encyclopedia misrepresented Esther Hicks’ story, skipping more facts than inserting untruths, but deliberately legitimizing her by anointing her claims as unquestioned facts.
Going back for a fresh look, I found a situation even worse than I remembered.
Struck by the extreme nature of “truths” claimed by Esther Hicks and her husband Jerry, who died in 2011 – but never on their website, I began researching their history, sharing with other skeptics and, more significant, talking with people who worked with them and knew them well.
Few public figures are in private what they seem in public. That’s obvious. We all have our public and private faces. With celebrities like Esther and Jerry Hicks, the contrast can be considerable. In few such situations is the difference as great.
I followed a conversation thread on Wikipedia, at a time when Esther Hicks’ popularity was soaring, where a representative from the Abraham-Hicks organization relentlessly argued for a positive portrayal of the couple. Her nearly religious zeal seems to have worked, the result being an encyclopedia page that isn’t just inaccurate, but turned to a virtual ad for Abraham-Hicks Publications.
Inaccuracies are posted as truth and Esther Hicks’ claim to channel “Abraham,” a group of “nonphysical entities” is verified by Wikipedia with actual quotes from “Abraham,” as if the editor actually spoke to the spirits personally.
The thrust of the encyclopedia page is straight out of the Abraham-Hicks playbook.
Forget for a moment the question of why a celebrity whose presentations are claimed to be enriched by “infinite intelligence” needs to fudge the records, but ask yourself what an encyclopedia is supposed to do.
I always believed that an encyclopedia is a reliable source of factual information on a topic or a person, objective and well-rounded. In this, Wikipedia fails, at least with Esther Hicks and other subjects diluted by public relations.
Wikipedia’s Romance with Esther Hicks
A Conversation with Spirits, as Reported by Wikipedia
“Jerry and Esther never used the word channeling,” Abraham clarifies. “It is used when applied to them, but they have never used it, because it means many things of which they are not, you see.”
“You could leave the channeling out of it. Call it inspiration; that’s all it is. You don’t call the basketball player a channeler, but he is; he’s an extension of Source Energy. You don’t call the surgeon a channeler, but he is. You don’t call the musician, the magnificent master musician, you don’t call him a channeler, but he is. He’s channeling the broader essence of who he is into the specifics of what he is about.”