www.fastcompany.com
Wikipedia has faced political threats for years, but this time, it may be at a breaking point.Republicans have ramped up attacks against Wikipedia as yet another woke institution. Leaked documents from The Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank that, show a plan for exposing specific Wikipedia editors. In January, Elon Musk, the billionaire-turned-government-efficiency-czar,called the online library an extension of legacy media propaganda. (He also once offered to pay $1 billion for the site if it changed its name to Dickipedia.)Conservatives have long accused Wikipedia of political prejudice. (And its not just staunch Republicans: Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger, who has never publicly identified himself as a Republican, turned on the digital library almost immediately after leaving in 2002, claiming it had a top-down left-wing bias.) In 2006, critic Andrew Schlafly even founded his own iteration of the site, Conservapedia. That conversation of bias continued for the following 20 years, and conservative think tanks have continually pumped out reports about Wikipedias supposed liberal tilt.Musk is in the middle of the latest controversyBut those were complaints, not attacks. Now, Musk and the MAGA movement could effectively kill Wikipedia. This cycle started with Musks inauguration arm-raise, which his Wikipedia page said was compared to a Nazi salute, but added that Musk denied any meaning behind the gesture. That particular entry sent Musk into a tirade on his social media platform X, first posting about Wikipedia as propaganda, and later saying that we should defund it. (Wikipedia is supported by individual and corporate donationsnot federal funds.) Wikipedias cofounder Jimmy Wales shot back: I think Elon is unhappy that Wikipedia is not for sale.While Musk is the public face of the latest crusade, theres been plenty of behind-the-scenes discussion about Wikipedia. According to documents obtained by Forward, The Heritage Foundation aims to target not just Wikipedia, but the sites editors. These individual contributors often work under online pseudonyms but, using strategies like digital fingerprinting and edit-tracking, The Heritage Foundation seems to promote finding these editors real-life identities. Its still unclear how The Heritage Foundation would use the information tracked, but the idea of being targeted itself could spook editors off the platform.These threats have Wikimedia executives worried. According to 404 Media, the leaders hosted a series of calls in the past few weeks about their ongoing political struggles, with Wales saying that hes keeping an eye on the rising noise of criticism from Elon Musk and others. Considering that The Heritage Foundation was behind Project 2025the legislative blueprint that has made its way into the White House during Trumps second termtheir fears may be justified.Wikipedia at the center of language politicsThe left has gotten in some jabs against Wikipedia, too. Liberals have struggled with the sites glacial conversations around potential edits to sensitive subjects. Should Ernest Hemingways trans daughter be referred to as Gloria or their birth name, Gregory? Should the term squaw, which the federal government deemed derogatory, be removed from the names of notable locations? These conversations can take weeks. Pro-Palestine activists have also been frustrated with the sites language surrounding Israel.Our politics has centralized around language. The left and the right have spent years squabbling over just which words are appropriatebut now, under Trump, the right is turning that fight into legislative shutdowns. Any site that traffics in words is under threat, from the online databases that Trump has shut down to the trans terminology Trump scrubbed from the Stonewall Monument.The culture wars have come for our public information sources. And Wikipedia is on the chopping block.