Wikipedia Co-Founder Claims Website Is Not ‘A Reliable Source Of Truth’

Despite saying that Wikipedia was supposed to be an accessible ‘open source project,’ he seemed dissatisfied with the current state of the website.

Sanger clarified the site now provides a ‘reliable establishment point of view on pretty much anything. But can you trust it to always give you the truth? Well, it depends on what you think the truth is.’

On the back of this, Sanger drew attention to the article on Joe Biden:

If you take a look at the Biden’s article, it has very little by way of the concerns that Republicans have had about him. So if you want to have anything remotely resembling the Republican point of view about Biden, you’re not going to get it from the article.

Many won’t be surprised by this comment. After all, Wikipedia is an open-source site that allows contributors to make comments and record history about specific topics. Naturally, this means people with a passion for a topic will usually contribute their perspective, which doesn’t always end up being factual.

Check out the interview with Sanger:

While most people know that Wikipedia can’t be trusted as an academic or reliable source, Sanger believes people with money have a monopoly on what is written.

He stated, ‘Wikipedia is known now by everyone to have a lot of influence in the world. So there’s a very big, nasty, complex game being played behind the scenes to make the article say what somebody wants them to say.’