Lulu Garcia Navarro

You've had editors doxed, pressured by governments to doctor information.

Some have had to flee their home countries.

I'm thinking of what's happened in Russia and India, where those governments have really taken aim at Wikipedia.

Would you say this is an expanding problem?

I want to bring up something that just happened here in the U.S.

In August, James Comer and Nancy Mace, two Republican representatives from the House Oversight Committee, wrote a letter to Wikimedia requesting records, communication, analysis on specific editors and also any reviews on bias regarding the state of Israel in particular.

Their reason, and I'm going to quote here,

is because they are investigating the efforts of foreign operations and individuals at academic institutions subsidized by U.S.

taxpayer dollars to influence U.S.

public opinion.

So can you tell me your reaction to that query?

Yeah, I mean, the Heritage Foundation here in the United States, which was the architect of Project 2025, have said that they want to dox your editors.

I mean, how do you protect people from that?

But it does seem that there is this movement on the right to target Wikipedia over these types of concerns.

And I'm wondering why you think that's happening.

I want to talk about a recent example of a controversy surrounding Wikipedia, and that's the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

You know, Senator Mike Lee called Wikipedia wicked because of the way it had described Kirk on its page as a far-right conspiracy theorist, among other complaints that they had about the page.

And I went to look at the time that we're speaking, and that description is now gone from Wikipedia.

Those on the left would say that that description was accurate.

Those on the right would say that that description was biased all along.