We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

Back in May, we told you about Wikipedia and its Orwellian editing of the article on the ‘Appeal to Heaven’ flag after the media decided this flag was a symbol of insurrection.

Advertisement

So it’s no surprise Wikipedia has a Left-wing bias, but here’s a report confirming it:

More from The Manhattan Institute:

In general, we find that Wikipedia articles tend to associate right-of-center public figures with somewhat more negative sentiment than left-of-center public figures; this trend can be seen in mentions of U.S. presidents, Supreme Court justices, congressmembers, state governors, leaders of Western countries, and prominent U.S.-based journalists and media organizations. We also find prevailing associations of negative emotions (e.g., anger and disgust) with right-leaning public figures and positive emotions (e.g., joy) with left-leaning public figures. In some categories of terms, such as the names of U.K. MPs and U.S.-based think tanks, we find no evidence of a difference in sentiment.

Our results suggest that Wikipedia is not living up to its stated neutral–point–of–view policy. This is concerning because we find evidence of some of Wikipedia’s prevailing sentiment associations for politically aligned public figures also popping up in OpenAI’s language models, which suggests that the political bias that we identify on the site may be percolating into widely used AI systems.

Recommended

Advertisement

This is a problem.

Of course we did.

Yes, it should be.

It’s not, but of course they belive this.

Always will be.

Not a soul.

Just like we don’t have time to protest at noon on Wednesday. We have jobs and responsibilities.

This writer just finished her BSN and you still can’t use it in an academic paper.

Advertisement

Yeah, printed materials are probably a good way to go these days.

We detect a hint of sarcasm here.