Why conservatives are turning on Wikipedia—and how Musk is fuelling the fight

Musk’s personal clash with Wikipedia has dovetailed with his broader ambitions in technology

In recent weeks, Wikipedia has become the unexpected focus of America’s culture wars. For years, the platform has been seen as a modern encyclopaedia—written and edited by volunteers, guided by strict rules about neutrality, verifiability, and the use of published sources. But critics on the right, including Elon Musk and Trump administration officials, now argue that Wikipedia is biased, dismissing it as “Wokepedia”, the Wall Street Journal reported.

A target in the culture wars

Wikipedia’s global reach is vast: it draws more traffic than most major media outlets, with over 64 million entries that shape how information surfaces in search engines and AI chatbots. That influence has made it a target for conservatives who see the site as amplifying mainstream media narratives. “Wikipedia shapes America,” said commentator Tucker Carlson, who has accused the site of dishonesty.

One flashpoint came earlier this year when Wikipedia volunteers updated Musk’s page to include references to hand gestures he made at Trump’s second inauguration that some described as resembling a Nazi salute. Musk ridiculed the claim but escalated his attacks on the site, calling for it to be “defunded” and suggesting it functions as an “extension of legacy media propaganda.”

A political pushback

The criticism isn’t only rhetorical. The Trump Justice Department sent Wikipedia a letter questioning its nonprofit tax status, while the Republican-led House Oversight Committee announced an investigation into alleged “organized efforts” to manipulate Wikipedia articles on sensitive subjects. This marks a sharp turn for an organization that depends on donations to fund its $200 million annual budget.

Larry Sanger, a co-founder of Wikipedia who left the project years ago, has also reignited the debate. Speaking on Tucker Carlson’s show, he claimed conservative and libertarian editors had been sidelined by a dominant group of administrators. “There is a whole army of administrators who are constantly blocking people they disagree with,” Sanger said.

Wikipedia’s defence

Jimmy Wales, the site’s co-founder who still serves as a prominent voice for its community, has rejected the accusations. He insists that the platform’s design—built on consensus among thousands of volunteers—provides independence. “The neutral point of view is nonnegotiable,” Wales said, adding that most contributors are not activists but “a bunch of really nice nerds.”

Still, Wales acknowledged that concerns about neutrality are taken seriously. A special committee is currently reviewing editorial practices.

Musk’s alternative: “Grokipedia”

Musk’s personal clash with Wikipedia has dovetailed with his broader ambitions in technology. Through his AI startup xAI, Musk recently announced plans for “Grokipedia,” a project that would draw on Wikipedia pages and other sources but attempt to add what he describes as missing context. The name was unveiled during a conference alongside David Sacks, Trump’s AI czar, who encouraged Musk to build a rival to what he called a biased platform.

For Musk, this marks a shift. He once publicly praised Wikipedia, sharing links on science and technology topics and even celebrating its 20th anniversary in 2021. But since acquiring Twitter, now X, his tone has changed. He has accused the site of becoming a political weapon and even mocked it by offering $1 billion if it would change its name to “Dickipedia.”

What’s at stake

Wikipedia has weathered controversies before, including fights over sourcing rules and edit wars on political topics. But this latest backlash ties into a broader campaign against media institutions under Trump’s second presidency. Public broadcasters like NPR and PBS have been defunded, tech platforms like YouTube and Meta have paid settlements to Trump’s administration, and legacy outlets face new political scrutiny.

In this climate, Wikipedia’s future as a trusted reference point is under pressure. Its critics see it as part of an establishment that silences alternative narratives. Its defenders say neutrality is still the bedrock principle—and that dismantling the platform risks replacing it with propaganda.

As Musk pushes Grokipedia and Washington lawmakers investigate, the fight over who gets to define “truth” online is only intensifying. For Wikipedia, once an unflashy corner of the internet, the culture war has arrived at its doorstep.