{"id":231186,"date":"2023-03-13T12:00:43","date_gmt":"2023-03-13T12:00:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=231186"},"modified":"2023-03-10T05:44:06","modified_gmt":"2023-03-10T05:44:06","slug":"wikipedia-a-disinformation-operation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2023\/03\/wikipedia-a-disinformation-operation\/","title":{"rendered":"Wikipedia: A Disinformation Operation?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Is Wikipedia an open encyclopedia or a covert disinformation operation?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

March 2023 – <\/em>Wikipedia is generally thought of as an open, transparent, and mostly reliable online encyclopedia. Yet upon closer inspection, this turns out not to be the case.<\/p>\n

In fact, the English Wikipedia with its 9 billion<\/a> worldwide page views per month is governed<\/a> by just 500 active administrators, whose real identity in many cases remains unknown.<\/p>\n

Furthermore, studies have shown that 80% of all Wikipedia content is written<\/a> by just 1% of all Wikipedia editors, which again amounts to just a few hundred mostly unknown people.<\/p>\n

Obviously, such a non-transparent and hierarchical structure is susceptible to corruption and manipulation, the notorious \u201cpaid editors\u201d<\/a> hired by corporations being just one example.<\/p>\n

For instance, in 2015 a German Wikipedia administrator was exposed<\/a> as a project manager at pharma\u00adceu\u00adtical company Merck who was whitewashing Wikipedia articles on Merck\u2019s history and products. Yet despite the exposure, the manager remained a Wikipedia administrator.<\/p>\n

In another case, a German journalist and PR consultant used several pseudonymous Wikipedia accounts to protect<\/a> French pharmaceutical corporation Sanofi-Aventis against negative studies.<\/p>\n

Already in 2007, researchers found that one of the most active and influential English Wikipedia administrators, called \u201cSlim Virgin\u201d, was in fact a former British intelligence informer<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Also in 2007, researchers found that CIA and FBI employees were editing<\/a> Wikipedia articles on controversial topics, including the Iraq war and the Guantanamo military prison.<\/p>\n

More recently, another highly prolific Wikipedia editor, going by the name of \u201cPhilip Cross\u201d<\/a>, turned out to be linked to British intelligence as well as several mainstream media journalists<\/a>.<\/p>\n

In fact, Wikipedia accepts almost only mainstream media outlets as \u201creliable sources\u201d<\/a>, while independent media outlets, regardless of their quality, remain largely excluded.<\/p>\n

In Germany, one of the most aggressive Wikipedia editors was exposed, after a two-year legal battle, as a political operative<\/a> formerly serving in the Israeli army as a foreign volunteer.<\/p>\n

The Israeli Ministry of Strategic Affairs has long been known to coordinate <\/a>activists in various countries who edit Wikipedia and other websites according to Israeli interests, and former Israeli Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett, previously organized courses in \u201cZionist editing\u201d<\/a> of Wikipedia.<\/p>\n

In 2023, it became known that the government of Saudi Arabia managed to install sixteen agents<\/a> as administrators of Wikipedia; the agents not only controlled articles on political topics, but revealed<\/a> the identities of two independent administrators to Saudi authorities \u2013 who put them in jail.<\/p>\n

Even in Switzerland, unidentified government employees were caught whitewashing Wikipedia entries<\/a> about the Swiss secret service just prior to a public referendum about the agency.<\/p>\n

Many of these Wikipedia personae are editing articles almost all day and every day<\/a>, indicating that they are either highly dedicated individuals, or in fact, operated by a group of people.<\/p>\n

In addition, articles edited by these personae cannot easily be revised, since the above-mentioned administrators<\/a> can always revert changes or simply block disagreeing users altogether.<\/p>\n

The primary goal of these covert campaigns appears to be<\/a> promoting establishment and industry positions while destroying the reputation of critics. Because of this, German watchdog group Wiki Radar described<\/a> Wikipedia as \u201cone of the most dangerous websites on the internet\u201d.<\/p>\n

Articles particularly affected by this kind of manipulation include medical, political, and certain historical topics as well as biographies of non-compliant academics, journalists, and politicians.<\/p>\n

Indeed, many Wikipedia manipulators belong to a group called the \u201cSkeptics\u201d<\/a>, an obscure organization that is \u201cskeptical\u201d of people challenging official establishment narratives. Former German intelligence chief Dr. Helmut Roewer described<\/a> the group as a \u201ccult-like criminal organization\u201d whose members serve as \u201ccyber warriors\u201d for corporate and political interests.<\/p>\n

During the coronavirus pandemic (2020 to 2022), members of the \u201cSkeptics\u201d organization played a leading role<\/a> in enforcing official, but mostly wrong narratives and defaming dissident researchers and journalists on Wikipedia. As one member put it<\/a>, \u201cthe skeptics will always run Wikipedia\u201d.<\/p>\n

On the complex topic of global climate change, too, the \u201cSkeptics movement\u201d is investing a lot of time and energy to assert the official view and vilify<\/a> dissenting researchers and authors.<\/p>\n

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, a friend<\/a> of former British PM Tony Blair and a \u201cYoung Global Leader\u201d<\/a> of the World Economic Forum, has repeatedly defended<\/a> these operations.<\/p>\n

Speaking of Davos, Wikimedia has itself amassed a fortune<\/a> of more than $160 million, donated in large part not by lazy students, but by major US corporations<\/a> and influential foundations<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Former Wikimedia CEO, Katherine Maher (2016-2021), previously worked at<\/a> the US Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) as well as at a subgroup of the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a CIA front organization<\/a> specialized in global influence operations and regime changes.<\/p>\n

Moreover, US social media and video platforms are increasingly referring to<\/a> Wikipedia to frame or combat \u201ccontroversial\u201d topics. The revelations discussed above may perhaps help explain why.<\/p>\n

Back in 2013, NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed<\/a> how spooks manipulate online debates, and in 2019 a senior Twitter executive turned out<\/a> to be a British Army \u201cpsyops\u201d officer. In 2023, the Twitter Files showed<\/a> how various US intelligence agencies censored the social media platform.<\/p>\n

To add at least some degree of transparency, German researchers have developed a free web browser tool called WikiWho<\/a> that lets readers color code just who edited what in Wikipedia.<\/p>\n

In many cases, the result looks as discomforting as one might expect.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
WikiWho \/ WhoColor (source<\/a>)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Wikipedia about SPR<\/h4>\n

In May 2020, a Wikipedia article about Swiss Policy Research was created. The German version<\/a>, written by well-known activists like \u201cGhormon\u201d, \u201cKurtR\u201d and \u201cAnidaat\u201d, consists mainly of negative media reports about SPR. Most of the English version<\/a> was written, anonymously, by one Mason Pelt<\/a>, an FBI informant (InfraGard<\/a>) and \u201cSkeptic\u201d from Dallas who specializes in \u201conline marketing\u201d. Other editors include a Hungarian Skeptic (\u201cMrFringilla\u201d) and a US political activist (\u201cGobonobo\u201d).<\/p>\n

Videos<\/h4>\n