Wikipedia banned its own co-founder last month for trying to make the site less biased.
Their response to that embarrassment just dropped on YouTube.
The man they threw out for asking it to represent more viewpoints is now watching Wikipedia run a marketing campaign telling your grandkids it's the most trustworthy source on the internet.
The Co-Founder They Banned for Asking for Balance
Larry Sanger co-founded Wikipedia in 2001 – the man who literally named it and wrote its original policies on neutrality and sourcing.
In June 2026, Wikipedia editors banned him permanently.
His crime?
Sanger launched a "WikiProject Intellectual Diversity" initiative and told his social media followers about it – asking conservatives and others who felt excluded to participate in the internal debate.
Wikipedia called that "off-wiki canvassing."
Sanger called it something else.
"Wikipedia changed the world," Sanger wrote afterward. "But its tragedy is that it grew so large that it sucked most of the air out of competing projects and, even as it grew to dominance, it was taken over by ideologues and shills who co-opted it for propaganda purposes."
Sanger called the process a "kangaroo court."
Three weeks later, the Wikimedia Foundation dropped three promotional videos insisting bias isn't real.
Zero Conservative Sources
The videos are part of a series called "A Wiki Minute."
One video bluntly answers the question "Is Wikipedia biased?" with one word: "Nope."
The Media Research Center reviewed Wikipedia's sourcing policies and found something striking.
Of 44 left-leaning outlets assessed by AllSides, 84% earned Wikipedia's "reliable source" stamp of approval.
Conservative outlets? Zero received that designation.
Breitbart and the Daily Caller are blacklisted outright.
The Epoch Times is marked "deprecated" and "generally unreliable."
The New York Post is labeled "questionable."
https://twitter.com/PirateWires/status/2079321084659368194?s=20
Fox News gets called "marginally reliable" for general news and "generally unreliable" for politics and opinion programming.
That's the source policy Wikipedia uses while telling your grandkids it presents "reliable information from many sources."
The "Wiki Minute" video on bias acknowledges none of this.
It mentions no studies identifying left-wing bias.
It never names Sanger, who spent years publicly documenting the problem before getting banned for trying to fix it.
The video description labels bias concerns a "myth."
The Foundation's marketing director calls this "debunking misconceptions."
Congress Investigated. Wikipedia Called It Genocide Anyway.
This isn't a fringe complaint from partisan activists.
In August 2025, Rep. James Comer and Rep. Nancy Mace opened a formal House Oversight investigation into Wikipedia's anti-Israel bias.
The Anti-Defamation League had already published a report identifying at least 30 coordinated editors systematically skewing Israel-related content – editors who were 18 times more active in internal communications than their peers.
Wikipedia had already crossed a line conservatives noticed first: the site changed its article title from "Gaza genocide allegations" to simply "Gaza genocide" – declaring as settled fact what most of the world treats as a contested claim.
The administrators who closed that debate were later found to have posted anti-Israel commentary on their personal social media accounts.
Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia's other co-founder, publicly criticized the change and got backlash from his own editors for it.
https://twitter.com/cremieuxrecueil/status/2079638808811671905?s=20
Then there's the Hunter Biden laptop story. Before the 2020 election, as traffic on related Wikipedia articles spiked, editors used the sourcing blacklist to strip out verified reporting from conservative outlets – the same outlets that turned out to be right.
A video insisting Wikipedia is "free from biased agendas" dropped this month while the site still presents "Gaza genocide" as established fact.
Telling Kids to Trust the Site That Ran Hoaxes for Years
The second promotional video encourages students to use Wikipedia for schoolwork, describing site content as "trustworthy" and assuring viewers that inaccurate information gets removed "in as little as seconds."
One day before that video's release, a World Cup referee was falsely labeled "Jewish" on Wikipedia for hours.
Anti-Semitic conspiracy theories citing that false label went viral on social media before anyone corrected it.
After Charlie Kirk was assassinated, his Wikipedia page ran an unsourced claim as an established fact for nearly two days – that Kirk "sought to fire or silence professors for sharing opinions."
Co-founder Wales and top administrators were actively monitoring the high-traffic page the entire time.
The Foundation's new CEO, Bernadette Meehan – who came to the job from the Obama and Biden administrations – recently acknowledged in a New York Times interview that AI competition is driving significant declines in readership.
Meanwhile, the third promotional video tells people to trust Wikipedia over AI tools – while the Wikimedia Foundation is simultaneously charging AI companies for high-speed access to Wikipedia's content and has commercial deals with major AI firms.
Clinton Foundation Communications Run Wikipedia's PR
The Foundation's public messaging strategy wasn't developed internally.
A 2016 communications audit by Minassian Media – run by Craig Minassian, former Head of Communications at the Clinton Foundation – recommended building Wikipedia's PR around fighting "fake news" and pushing harder on "diversity" themes.
That playbook is still in use.
In 2020, the Foundation sided with the Black Lives Matter movement and officially announced there was "no neutral stance" on the issue.
It runs annual "Wiki Loves Pride" editing campaigns and feminist edit-a-thons.
It describes its mission using phrases like "knowledge equity" and references "structures of power and privilege" in official communications.
Every video in the series – except one early clip acknowledging a "diversity gap" using that same ideological framework – tells viewers the bias criticism isn't real.
The Foundation's own marketing director noted the series was designed to build "understanding and even affinity" for Wikipedia among press contacts and donors.
They're telling your grandkids to use this for homework.
They banned the man who built it for suggesting it should represent more than one perspective.
That's not a debunked myth.
That's the story Wikipedia doesn't want in the email preview.
Sources:
- T.D. Adler, "Wikipedia Releases Promotional Videos Denying Leftist Bias, Promoting Use by Students for Homework," Breitbart, July 22, 2026.
- Larry Sanger, "I co-founded Wikipedia, but anonymous mob runs the show. Now I'm banned," Washington Examiner, July 2026.
- Larry Sanger, "I Co-Founded Wikipedia. Now I'm Banned for Life," The Free Press, June 2026.
- "Wikipedia Bans '100 Percent' of Conservative Media," Newsmax, February 6, 2025.
- "Wikipedia's Blacklist: Smearing Trump, Conservatives, And The GOP," Daily Wire, February 3, 2025.
- Aaron Bandler, "House panel probing organized efforts to distort Wikipedia, including entries on Israel," JNS, August 28, 2025.
- "US Congress investigating Wikimedia over Israel bias," Jerusalem Post, August 28, 2025.
