Wikipedia is under scrutiny.
A significant development is unfolding in the oversight of digital information platforms as acting US Attorney for Washington, DC, Ed Martin initiated an investigation last week into the Wikimedia Foundation that could jeopardize its tax-exempt status.
Martin’s inquiry centers on allegations that Wikipedia has become a vehicle for foreign propaganda disguised as “objective information,” contrary to American interests.
Good news: Wikipedia is finally facing serious scrutinyEd Martin, the interim U.S. attorney in Washington, has sent a major letter to the Wikimedia Foundation, warning that it "is engaging in a series of activities that could violate its obligations" under Section 501(c)(3) of… pic.twitter.com/uuoAuaMrsU
— WikiBias (@WikiBias2024) April 25, 2025
The investigation follows extensive research by several outlets, most prominently Pirate Wires, which identified approximately 40 pro-Palestinian editors allegedly dominating Wikipedia’s “Palestine-Israel Articles” section through coordinated editing campaigns involving tens of thousands of modifications.
Martin contends that these activities enable “foreign actors to manipulate information and spread propaganda to the American public,” while facilitating the “rewriting of key historical events and biographical records of American leaders” in ways that potentially undermine US national security.
Evidence supporting these claims has mounted over recent months. In October 2024, Pirate Wires reported that anti-Israel editors had systematically removed references to the 1988 Hamas Charter’s call for jihad against Jews.
Likewise, in March 2025, the Anti-Defamation League published findings documenting how 30 editors collaborated to bypass Wikipedia’s safeguards against antisemitic content.
Further substantiating these concerns, journalist Aaron Bandler released hundreds of screenshots in April 2025 showing coordination among “Tech for Palestine” community members to influence Wikipedia content.
Additionally, reports emerged of a Harvard Wikipedia editing marathon specifically targeting companies that had opposed campus antisemitism.
A techno-dystopia
Shlomit Aharoni Lir, research fellow at the University of Haifa and founding member of Forum Dvorah, offered her insights on the controversy. As an expert who has conducted several studies on bias in Wikipedia, she brings a unique academic perspective to the debate.
“The Wikipedia project, in its conceptual framework, stands as one of the Internet’s most remarkable and empowering initiatives,” Aharoni Lir said, noting that she had personally contributed numerous entries to Hebrew Wikipedia over many years.
However, she commented that her research in the politics of knowledge has revealed concerning trends.“Bias editors have turned the platform into a tool of information warfare and propaganda that hurts the universal human search for truth,” she explained.
Aharoni Lir pointed to what she described as an “increasing domination” of English Wikipedia by individuals with political agendas who aren’t interested in neutrality on controversial issues.
She said this development has “transformed the techno-utopian vision into a techno-dystopian reality” when it comes to articles related to sensitive political matters, including the conflict.
Her findings specifically indicate a process of “demonization of Israel and attempts of erasing Jewish connection to the land of Israel,” as well as whitewashing of terrorism and outright antisemitism on the platform.
Aharoni Lir revealed that interviews with 16 Jewish English Wikipedia editors had raised major concerns about the “difficulty, and at times impossibility, of correcting biased content directed against Israel,” a problem she said had “notably intensified since October 7.”
She added that she was currently working on an exhibition featuring seven Wikipedia articles that had been severely reedited since October 7, making them “more about propaganda and promoting one-sided agenda than sharing unbiased information.”
While acknowledging the noble pursuit of free knowledge, Aharoni Lir emphasized the responsibility to protect it from those who “exploit the platform to spread lies, misinformation, and bias.” She concluded that clear rules and active oversight by the foundation are essential, expressing hope that “it is not too late to implement them.”
“The letter serves as a wake-up call,” Aharoni Lir continued. “One that the foundation itself appears to recognize. In early April, it announced the formation of a group to monitor neutrality. The prosecutor’s letter underscores the urgency of meaningful change, especially given the platform’s immense influence on AI systems and Google search results. It is crucial that the foundation demonstrate a willingness to navigate the balance between freedom and accountability in order to preserve the platform’s core vision of neutrality.”
As this investigation proceeds, it raises profound questions about the governance, neutrality, and accountability of platforms that shape public discourse and historical understanding in the digital age.