Wikipedia: Accuracy or Prejudice? Islamophobia in the Web 2.0 Era

This article is part of a Wikipedia Religious UnReliable Sources series.

This article explores whether Wikipedia upholds its promise of neutrality or perpetuates prejudice against Islam, examining the role of Web 2.0 dynamics and Islamophobia.

Is the free encyclopedia contributing to the global spread of Islamophobia? Is it enabling anti-Islam or Muslim narratives? While studies show a “balance” on the platform between praise and censure of Islam, examining the history of the articles on the subject indicates the lack of a neutral point of view by the platform’s editors. As an open space of information, often used by those who have little to no knowledge of a subject, it is Wikipedia’s “social responsibility ethics” or public duty to be balanced on a topic that is so volatile and for Admins to ensure neutrality.

Wikipedia has faced continued criticism over the years regarding its treatment of sensitive topics like Islam. In truth, it is not only Islam that suffers this fate.

Despite this mission, since its inception on January 15, 2001, its mission has been to provide free and accurate information. Indeed, Wikipedia has become one of the most influential sources of information globally. But one has to wonder if the beliefs of its cofounders influence an unofficial policy when it comes to religion — and Islam in particular. Some critics argue that, after all, its creators are agnostic philosophy professor Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales, an atheist who refers to himself as Wikipedia’s “spiritual leader.”

The platform’s promise of neutrality is frequently called into question by its treatment of religion and other controversial topics, with critics arguing that it often reflects a strong liberal bias. This article examines whether Wikipedia favors accuracy or perpetuates prejudice against Islam, influenced by selective Web 2.0 dynamics and Islamophobia.

Origins and Neutrality Policy

Wikipedia was designed to be an open-source encyclopedia where anyone could contribute, making it a revolutionary project in the world of information. Wales and Sanger envisioned a space where collective intelligence could produce a comprehensive and reliable knowledge repository. The open nature of Wikipedia should be its greatest strength. Its official neutrality policy mandates that all articles be written from a neutral point of view, representing all significant views fairly and without bias. Yet this ideal is not always achieved in practice, as illustrated by criticisms from notable commentators. Achieving such neutrality is complicated by the nature of its contributors. Journalist Joseph Farah criticized the platform, stating that it is “not only a provider of inaccuracy and bias but a wholesale purveyor of lies and slander unlike any other the world has ever known.”

So the question remains, can Wikipedia truly uphold its commitment to neutrality, particularly in the coverage of contentious topics like Islam?

Post-9/11 Media Representation of Islam

Islam’s coverage in global media changed dramatically in the early 2000s. The September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks launched an information war and greatly changed how Islam was represented in the media. The attacks thrust Islam into the global spotlight, and coverage of the religion increased exponentially. This surge of attention also led to a significant shift in how Islam was framed, often associating the religion with terrorism and extremism. Misrepresentation occurred not only in the media but also in Web 2.0, especially Wikipedia, which was influenced by these trends, where the majority of articles related to what is bad about the religion rather than presenting its teachings. Was this part of a broader media agenda?

Media and online representation of Muslims during this period frequently reinforced harmful stereotypes, such as the depiction of Muslims as radical insurgents bent on waging Jihad against the West. These portrayals contributed to the widespread belief that violence is an inseparable part of Islam, further entrenching negative perceptions of the religion and its followers.

Wikipedia’s Role in Shaping Perceptions of Islam

Given its open-editing model, Wikipedia’s content is shaped by the contributions of millions of users worldwide. However, this model also means that the perspectives and biases of these contributors significantly influence how topics are represented.

One user on Quora wrote this about Wikipedia’s coverage of Islam: “Most of English Wikipedia’s contributors are academically inclined English speakers. This overrepresentation of Western perspectives can lead to a skewed portrayal of Islamic topics, reflecting the interests, biases, and experiences of Western contributors rather than offering a balanced view.”

This imbalance is not merely a theoretical concern. A study by Majid et al. analyzing Wikipedia’s coverage of Islam found that while positive representations of Islam exist, they are frequently overshadowed by negative portrayals. For example, articles on “Islamic Governments and States” often focus on issues of violence and human rights abuses, reinforcing the stereotype of Islam as a religion of violence. In contrast, topics like “Nature of Islam” or “Islamic Texts and Teachings” receive less attention. This contributes to a one-sided view of the religion.

Different Languages Contribute Diverse Perceptions of Islam

The impact of contributor bias on Wikipedia’s coverage of Islam is further complicated by the platform’s language diversity. Wikipedia exists in multiple languages, each with its own community of contributors. The focus of articles, the availability of certain subjects, and the overall shape of Islam can vary significantly depending on the language in which the content is written. For example, Wikipedia in Persian has a more promotional representation of Islam than the English version of Wikipedia.

English Wikipedia may emphasize certain aspects of Islam based on the interests and biases of Western contributors, while non-English versions of Wikipedia may offer different perspectives. Research has shown that the coverage of topics on Wikipedia changes depending on the cultural and historical contexts of the contributors. This means that Wikipedia articles in different languages may focus more on the culture or history. According to the same study, among 2,249 total entries about Islam on Wikipedia by English editors, 51.71% of the entries paint a positive or neutral picture while the rest are laden with hate and negative scripts. In other words, nearly half the representation of Islam is damaging to people’s perspective and encourages Islamophobia.

Additionally, English predominates as the global language of academia and the internet. Thus, English Wikipedia often serves as the primary source of information for many users worldwide. This overrepresentation or stress of English-language perspectives can lead to the dominance of Western perspectives in the global discourse on Islam, potentially marginalizing other viewpoints.

WikiIslam: Not Wikipedia but Web 2.0

WikiIslam, a website originally created to critique Islam or for propaganda purposes, operates similarly to Wikipedia, since the content is user-generated. WikiIslam claims to have recently revised its content to achieve greater neutrality and objectivity. The site’s editors have implemented policies aimed at reducing biased and polarized content, positioning WikiIslam as a more academic and unbiased resource.

Despite these efforts, the history of bias on WikiIslam proves the prejudice in online content. The platform’s origins as a site critical of Islam means that it still carries a reputation for bias, even as it seeks to reinvent itself as a neutral resource. The digital media push toward neutrality might take some time to tone down online Islamophobia. One of the major challenges to achieving that remains the universality of editors.

Selectivism About Content: Web 2.0 Design and Islamophobia

The rise of Web 2.0 technologies, which emphasize user-generated content and social collaboration, has transformed how information is disseminated and consumed online. Platforms like Wikipedia are central to this transformation, allowing a wide range of contributors to shape the content that millions of people rely on for information. However, the open nature of these platforms also makes them vulnerable to the selective representation of topics, influenced by the biases of contributors.

This selective representation is not just a matter of individual bias; it is also influenced by broader cultural and societal trends. The media’s focus on Islam in the context of terrorism and violence, particularly since 9/11, has shaped how the religion is discussed and perceived in public discourse. This focus can lead to the reinforcement of negative stereotypes, even on platforms like Wikipedia that strive for neutrality.

For example, negative stereotypes of Muslims as violent or extremist may be disproportionately represented on Wikipedia, while positive aspects of the religion, such as its teachings on peace and compassion, receive less attention.

Navigating Bias and Achieving Balance

To address these challenges, it is crucial for users to approach Wikipedia with a critical mindset, understanding that the content they encounter may reflect the biases of its contributors. Users should seek out diverse perspectives, including content from non-English versions of Wikipedia and other platforms, to gain a more balanced understanding of Islam.

In addition to individual efforts, there is also a need for broader changes in how Wikipedia and similar platforms operate. This includes greater emphasis on the inclusion of diverse perspectives, particularly from underrepresented communities, as well as efforts to address and mitigate the impact of contributor bias. By fostering a culture of impartiality and accuracy, Wikipedia can better fulfill its mission of providing a reliable and neutral resource for all users.

Wikipedia’s impact on global perceptions of Islam underscores the importance of ensuring neutrality and inclusivity, particularly in an era of digital information where biases can easily spread.

We want to hear from you! If you are a religious leader, a parishioner, or a Wikipedia editor who has come across something in this area, we encourage you to contact us at wrn-info@proton.me. Your insights and expertise are very valuable in ensuring that accurate and comprehensive information is available to the public.