The Wiki Hijack: Wikipedia’s Slide Into Anti-Israel Propaganda

In October 2025, as the world marked the second anniversary of the horrific October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks that claimed over 1,200 Israeli lives and saw hundreds taken hostage, Wikipedia—the self-proclaimed bastion of neutral knowledge—revealed its true colors. Far from providing balanced, factual accounts, the platform amplified narratives that downplayed the atrocities, equated Jewish self-determination with colonialism, and framed Israel’s defensive actions as genocidal. This wasn’t mere oversight; it was the culmination of a coordinated effort by biased editors to distort content, promoting antisemitism and an anti-Israel agenda. Reports from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and investigations by U.S. Congress exposed a platform hijacked by ideology, turning what billions rely on for information into a tool of propaganda.

The ADL’s March 2025 report, “Editing for Hate: How Anti-Israel and Anti-Jewish Bias Undermines Wikipedia’s Neutrality,” laid bare the extent of the problem. Researchers uncovered a network of at least 30 editors who, over years, circumvented Wikipedia’s policies to inject antisemitic narratives and misleading information into articles on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. These editors, twice as active as their peers and 18 times more communicative among themselves, systematically skewed content: downplaying Palestinian terrorism, foregrounding criticisms of Israel, and trivializing antisemitism. By October 2025, this bias had metastasized, influencing real-time coverage of ongoing events like Israel’s operations against Hezbollah and Hamas.

Consider the “Gaza genocide” article, which by October 2025 presented Israel’s military actions not as a response to rocket fire and terrorism, but as an “ongoing, intentional, and systematic destruction of the Palestinian people.” Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales himself decried the page as “particularly egregious” and in violation of neutrality standards, yet it remained locked with biased framing intact. This wasn’t balanced journalism; it aligned Wikipedia with fringe views held by regimes like Iran, North Korea, and Hamas sympathizers, while ignoring denials from the U.S., U.K., and Germany. Dissenters were smeared as akin to Holocaust deniers, a grotesque inversion that weaponizes Jewish trauma to silence criticism of the narrative.

The distortion extended to foundational concepts. The “Zionism” article, edited heavily by a group dubbed the “Gang of 40” by investigative journalist Ashley Rindsberg, equated the movement for Jewish self-determination with “ethnic cleansing” and colonialism. This rewrite, solidified in 2025, erased Zionism’s roots in indigenous Jewish liberation from millennia of persecution, replacing it with a lens that portrays Israel as an illegitimate settler state. On X (formerly Twitter), users like @WikiBias highlighted how, on the October 7 anniversary in 2025, Wikipedia’s coverage minimized the massacres, reframing terror as “resistance” and scrubbing references to Hamas’s genocidal charter. Edits from poisonous networks erased Israeli perspectives, turning historical facts into political propaganda.

These manipulations weren’t isolated. The Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in November 2025 described English Wikipedia as an “arena of the anti-Israeli struggle,” where entries like “Palestinian genocide accusation” and “Comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany” relied on one-sided sources critical of Israel, omitting context or counterarguments. Articles normalized parallels that delegitimize Israel’s existence, while downplaying antisemitic violence. For instance, the “Weaponization of antisemitism” page portrayed accusations of Jew-hatred as manipulative tactics by Israel, trivializing real threats and echoing age-old tropes of Jewish deceit.

By October 2025, this bias had real-world ramifications. U.S. lawmakers, including Reps. James Comer and Nancy Mace, launched a congressional probe in August, demanding Wikimedia Foundation records on patterns of manipulation related to antisemitism and Israel. They cited studies showing state-backed operations, possibly from pro-Russia or other hostile actors, exploiting Wikipedia to spread anti-Israel framing. The World Jewish Congress, echoing earlier 2024 findings, accused the platform of systemic bias post-October 7, with entries showing a one-sided narrative that shaped global perceptions for millions.

Wikipedia’s reach exacerbates the issue. With 500 million monthly unique views, its content feeds AI models like ChatGPT and Gemini, perpetuating distortions. Lazy researchers and students absorb these biases, normalizing antisemitism under the guise of “neutrality.” In October 2025, as Hezbollah rockets rained on Israel, Wikipedia’s entries on the conflict foregrounded Palestinian suffering while minimizing Israeli civilian casualties, creating a false equivalence that erodes empathy for Jewish victims.

Critics argue this stems from Wikipedia’s volunteer model, vulnerable to coordinated campaigns. The ADL identified editors evading rules to insert falsehoods, such as downplaying October 7 rapes or accusing Israel of falsifying claims. Bipartisan lawmakers in May 2025 demanded Wikimedia curb such bias and pro-terrorist content. Yet, despite bans on some editors in February 2025 for disruptive behavior, their edits lingered, poisoning the well.

This isn’t just about Israel; it’s a crisis of truth. Wikipedia’s downgrade of the ADL as “generally unreliable” on the conflict in June 2024, while citing anti-Israel groups, exemplifies the inversion. As Aish.com noted in November 2025, a coordinated assault injects anti-Jewish content, with editors 18 times more likely to collaborate. Even Wikipedia’s own page on “Antisemitism on Wikipedia” acknowledges misconduct, from neo-Nazi mobilizations to vandalism.

As we reflect on the distortions, remember: knowledge is power, but twisted knowledge is poison. Wikipedia’s fall from grace endangers us all, fueling antisemitism in an already divided world. It’s time to reclaim the truth.

References and Further Reading