For Wikipedia, “true” is now synonymous with “left wing,” as a bombshell new report from the Media Research Center reveals. Will Google and other search sites adjust for that bias?
The slant is unquestionable: Wikipedia maintains a blacklist compendium of sources that page writers and editors are allowed to cite — and guess which will get you in trouble?
Outfits like the Daily Caller, the Federalist, the Washington Free Beacon, Fox News and even The Post.
Notice a theme?
It’s certainly not the reason Wikipedia claims, i.e., that these sites are especially unreliable.
Quite the contrary.
The Post’s 100% correct Hunter Biden reporting was tagged as disinformation by Big Tech and its allies in an effort to help Joe Biden win the election.
The Free Beacon delivers scoop after scoop, all fully backed up by documents, on government malfeasance and lefty insanity.
No — it’s that its journalism cuts against preferred lefty narratives and embarrasses progressives in positions of corporate and governmental power.
For proof, look at the sites that get the green light from Wikipedia.
The New York Times, a chief organ of actual disinformation on everything from Joe Biden’s glaring senility to COVID risks.
Vox, another lefty disinfo bomb (and font of general stupidity: Remember the infamous bridge its reporter Zack Beauchamp hallucinated between Gaza and the West Bank?).
Jacobin, for Pete’s sake — an outfit only slightly less extreme than al Qaeda’s in-house publication Inspire.
Indeed, Wikipedia refuses its stamp of approval to 100% of right-leaning media sources versus only 16% of left-leaning ones.
Recall too that ultra-left NPR CEO Katherine Maher served as the head of Wikipedia’s parent foundation from 2016 to 2021 — and that she has called the First Amendment her “number one challenge” to fighting “disinformation.”
The source blacklist has zero to do with accuracy and everything to do with shutting down any journalist who doesn’t bend the knee to the left.
And stifling any discourse not approved by progressive would-be overlords in biz and government and the NGO sector.
In other words, Wikipedia is engaged in an actual disinformation op.
Other information-space players have a duty to face this fact, or be complicit: Notably, Wikipedia is routinely a top result in Google information searches.
Whether they blacklist Wiki or simply flag its blatant bias, Big Tech firms need to prove their commitment to open discourse is more than just cosmetic.
This story originally appeared on NYPost
