By: Fern Sidman

Six weeks after a House Oversight Committee deadline to turn over documents concerning alleged antisemitic bias on Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation—the San Francisco-based nonprofit that manages the site—has yet to comply with lawmakers’ demands. The delay has heightened scrutiny from Congress amid concerns that coordinated editing campaigns have been spreading anti-Israel propaganda and whitewashing the activities of terrorist organizations.

According to a report on Tuesday at The Jewish News Syndicate (JNS), a spokesperson for Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), who chairs the House Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Information Technology and Government Innovation, confirmed that the foundation has not met its obligations to produce the requested records. “The Wikimedia Foundation is engaging with the Oversight Committee about its request, but it has not satisfied document production at this time,” said Carlie Baker, Mace’s press assistant, in a statement to JNS.

The lack of transparency has frustrated lawmakers who say the foundation’s reluctance to cooperate underscores the seriousness of the allegations. Both Mace and Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, have demanded answers from Wikimedia’s leadership regarding how it polices ideological manipulation on one of the world’s most influential information platforms.

As The Jewish News Syndicate (JNS) reported, the controversy stems from a House Oversight letter sent on August 27 to the foundation’s chief executive officer, calling for internal documents related to “actions by Wikipedia volunteer editors caught violating platform policies” and details on any “efforts to thwart intentional, organized attempts to inject bias into sensitive topics.” The lawmakers gave Wikimedia until September 10 to respond.

The request followed multiple reports, including one by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in March, which found evidence of a coordinated network of 30 Wikipedia editors systematically inserting antisemitic narratives and anti-Israel misinformation into articles about the Middle East. The ADL’s report detailed how editors collaborated across forums to distort historical events, amplify conspiracy theories about Jewish influence, and sanitize references to terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah.

“Wikipedia is a widely used educational resource,” Mace and Comer wrote in their August letter, as cited in the JNS report. “The American public deserves transparency from a platform that so heavily influences public understanding of geopolitics, religion, and history.”

They noted that recent findings “raise troubling questions about potentially systematic efforts to advance antisemitic and anti-Israel information in Wikipedia articles related to conflicts with the State of Israel.”

Wikipedia, launched in 2001 as a user-generated encyclopedia, has grown into one of the most visited websites in the world, consulted daily by millions of readers and cited across academia, journalism, and public discourse. Its open-editing model—while celebrated for democratizing information—has long faced criticism for being vulnerable to ideological manipulation.

As the JNS report pointed out, the Wikimedia Foundation relies heavily on a volunteer editor network to update and monitor content, guided by a set of neutrality and sourcing standards. Yet in practice, the self-policing model has often failed to prevent organized editing campaigns driven by political or religious bias.

Lawmakers now want to know what internal mechanisms Wikimedia has in place to detect and prevent systemic antisemitic content—and whether those mechanisms have been effectively enforced.

“Wikipedia’s global reach makes it uniquely powerful,” one congressional aide told JNS. “When false or hateful information about Jews and Israel circulates unchecked, it doesn’t just misinform readers—it contributes to the normalization of antisemitism worldwide.”

The congressional pressure intensified earlier this month when Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who chairs the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, sent his own letter to Wikimedia CEO Maryana Iskander on October 3, demanding information about what he described as “ideological bias” within the foundation and its editorial ranks.

In the letter, which was obtained by JNS, Cruz referenced “detailed evidence of a coordinated editing campaign to push antisemitic content on the platform.” He cited documentation showing that over the past decade, a network of editors carried out more than 1.5 million edits designed to shape perceptions of Israel and Jewish history.

“These were not ‘organic changes that occur on Wikipedia as editors update pages to reflect evolving understandings of complex issues,’” Cruz wrote. “Rather, this was a long-running, coordinated scheme that involved serious infractions to Wikipedia’s anti-bias policies.”

He added that the editorial activity in question “whitewashed the activities of groups like Hamas, distorted the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and injected antisemitic tropes into discussions about Zionism, Jewish power, and the legitimacy of Israel as a state.”

The JNS report noted that Cruz’s intervention marks a significant escalation of federal oversight, with both chambers of Congress now demanding greater accountability from one of the most influential digital platforms in existence.

The Anti-Defamation League’s March report, cited in the JNS report, described a concerted effort by anonymous editors to reshape Wikipedia’s Israel-related pages. Among the most alarming findings were deliberate attempts to downplay Hamas’s designation as a terrorist organization, to omit details of its human rights abuses, and to inflate claims of Israeli aggression.

The ADL also uncovered patterns of language manipulation: replacing terms such as “terrorist” with “militant,” minimizing Hamas rocket attacks, and framing anti-Israel violence as “resistance.”

According to the ADL, such tactics are designed to exploit Wikipedia’s editorial guidelines—using the appearance of “neutrality” to advance an anti-Israel agenda under the guise of balance. “The goal is to embed antisemitic narratives into the foundation of public knowledge,” one analyst told JNS. “Once it’s on Wikipedia, it becomes part of the informational ecosystem.”

Despite repeated outreach, JNS reported that the Wikimedia Foundation has yet to issue a substantive public statement addressing the allegations. A spokesperson for the foundation confirmed only that it was “engaging with the Oversight Committee,” offering no explanation for the delay in document production.

This silence has fueled bipartisan concern that the organization may be reluctant to confront ideological extremism within its volunteer base. “It’s not enough to say you’re investigating,” one senior congressional staffer told JNS. “When Congress requests evidence of bias in a platform that shapes global opinion, compliance is not optional.”

Some observers suggest that Wikimedia’s reticence reflects deeper institutional challenges. As JNS reported, the foundation has struggled for years to balance transparency with the autonomy of its volunteer community—a tension that becomes acute when allegations of political manipulation arise.

“Wikipedia is at a crossroads,” said an expert quoted by JNS. “Either it takes proactive steps to root out organized antisemitic disinformation, or it risks becoming complicit in spreading it.”

The congressional inquiries come amid a broader reckoning over antisemitism in digital spaces, as lawmakers and advocacy groups push tech platforms to do more to curb hate speech and disinformation. The issue has become particularly urgent in the wake of rising antisemitic incidents worldwide, and in the context of ongoing efforts by anti-Israel movements to distort public narratives online.

As the JNS report observed, Wikipedia’s influence far exceeds that of typical social media sites. Its content informs textbooks, search-engine summaries, and media reporting, making ideological bias within its pages especially dangerous.

“Wikipedia’s power lies in its credibility,” JNS noted in its coverage. “If that credibility is weaponized to normalize antisemitism or delegitimize the Jewish state, the damage extends far beyond the internet.”

Lawmakers in both the House and Senate have signaled that they may pursue additional measures if Wikimedia continues to resist transparency. Staff for Rep. Mace told JNS that the committee is “prepared to escalate oversight actions” should the foundation fail to produce the requested materials in the coming weeks.

Meanwhile, advocacy organizations such as the ADL and the American Jewish Committee are urging Congress to hold public hearings on the issue, arguing that digital accountability must include open-source platforms that wield enormous influence over global discourse.

“Wikipedia has an obligation to ensure that antisemitic narratives are not embedded in its infrastructure,” an ADL spokesperson told JNS. “Truth and neutrality are not negotiable.”

For now, Congress waits. The Wikimedia Foundation’s ongoing silence has left unresolved questions about how an open-source encyclopedia with billions of readers intends to safeguard truth from ideological distortion.

As the JNS report observed, the stakes extend far beyond politics. “Wikipedia’s credibility as a neutral knowledge platform depends on its willingness to confront bias—especially the oldest and most dangerous bias of all: antisemitism.”