Elon Musk calls on a donation stop for Wikipedia: This is behind it!

Elon Musk calls on a donation stop for Wikipedia: This is behind it!

Brooklyn, USA - Elon Musk, the billion dollar entrepreneur and CEO of Tesla, once again caused turmoil. The richest man in the world asks his supporters to turn away from one of the largest online knowledge treasures: Wikipedia. In a heated post on the platform X, Musk described the encyclopedia as "Wokepedia" and made fun of their supposedly unbalanced reporting. "Stop donating to Wokepedia until you have restored your editorial balance," he said. Musk refers to the fact that the Wikimedia Foundation, which Wikipedia operates, spends 30 percent of its budget for diversity and inclusion, which is considered problematic in the right corner, as oe24.at reported.

Musk's criticism of Wikipedia

The term "Wokepedia" is a pun, which critically deals with sensitivity to social issues. According to reports that can also be found in an analysis of snopes, Musk Wikipedia sees as a same platform that no longer takes care of objective reporting. In particular, Musk refers to a graphic from Libs of Tiktok that says that the Wikimedia Foundation spent over $ 50 million for "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion" in the financial year 2023-24. These initiatives are intended to ensure that different voices and perspectives are represented, but are perceived by conservative groups as discrimination. A spokesman for the Wikimedia Foundation made it clear that the goals of the organization are differentiated and are not limited to the traditional Dei policy, as in snopes.com

It is important that Musks call to boycott is not only a personal opinion, but could also have an impact on the public willingness to donate. The criticism of Wikipedia is reinforced by Musk, who, with its reach, turns to a wide audience. In the meantime, Wikipedia remains a place where volunteer editors and volunteers are tirelessly trying to maintain an unadulterated and comprehensive knowledge archive, regardless of the controversy about its editorial politics.