This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Wikipedia is viewed by many as an online resource for a lot of information, information on just about anything and anyone.
But those who look more closely have noted the leftist ideology to the point it actually contains wrong information on topics disliked by the left.
Now a prosecutor has put those concerns into words, announcing accusations that Wikimedia Foundation, which runs Wikipedia among other projects, violated its 501(c)3 tax-exempt status by "allowing propaganda and misinformation from 'foreign actors' to flourish on the platform," according to a report at Breitbart.
Wikimedia Foundation is the organization that runs various projects including Wikipedia, Wiktionary and others.
Now, Interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Ed Martin is accusing the Wikimedia Foundation of lawbreaking.
The report explained the group's tax-exempt status has been questioned in a letter Martin dispatched to the foundation.
"As you know, Section 501(c)3 requires that organizations receiving tax-exempt status operate exclusively for 'religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or education purposes … [.] It has come to my attention that the Wikimedia Foundation, through its wholly owned subsidiary Wikipedia, is allowing foreign actors to manipulate information and spread propaganda to the American public," Martin charges.
The letter continues, explaining that the organization is allowing bad actors to be "rewriting of key, historical events and biographical information of current and previous American leaders, as well as other matters implicating the national security and the interests of the United States. Masking propaganda that influences public opinion under the guise of providing informational material is antithetical to Wikimedia's 'educational' mission."
Further, the letter explains, "Wikipedia's operations are directed by its board that is composed primarily of foreign nationals, subverting the interests of American taxpayers. Again, educational content is directionally neutral; but information received by my Office demonstrates that Wikipedia's informational management policies benefit foreign powers."
Further, "We are aware that search engines such as Google have agreed to prioritize Wikipedia results due to the relationship that Wikipedia has established with these tech platforms. If the content contained in Wikipedia articles is biased, unreliable, or sourced by entities who wish to do harm to the United States, search engine prioritization of Wikipedia will only amplify propaganda to a larger American audience."
Martin notes that the problem just gets worse, as "It has come to our attention that generative AI platforms receive Wikipedia data to train large-language models. This data is now consumed by masses of Americans and American teachers on a daily basis. If the data provided is manipulated, particularly by foreign actors and entities, Wikipedia's relationship with generative AI platforms have the potential to launder information on behalf of foreign actors."
His office said it wants answers to questions including, "What mechanisms does the Wikimedia Foundation have in place to fulfill its legal and ethical responsibilities to safeguard the public from the dissemination of propaganda, particularly in light of its designation as a tax-exempt organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and in light of the Foundation's longstanding hands-off policy regarding Trust & Safety (including content moderation and editor
misconduct)?"
Also, how does it handle "editor misconduct," how does it handle accountability and how does it "exclude foreign influence operations."
"What is the Foundation's official process for addressing credible allegations that editors or contributors have materially misled readers, engaged in bad-faith edits, or otherwise manipulated content in ways that undermine Wikipedia's commitment to neutrality?" Martin wants to know. And, "Does the Foundation maintain a public, formally adopted policy explicitly prohibiting hateful content and conduct by editors?"
