Right wing extremist organization, the Heritage Foundation, is apparently planning on targeting people who edit Wikipedia.
It’s no secret that the far right is at war with free speech. Specifically, they love to talk a big game about protecting free speech, yet when it comes to speech they personally disagree with, then it’s OK to unleash heavy censorship or worse to silence those they personally disagree with. A shining example is the string of scandals enveloping mainstream media involving the silencing of those who attempt to publish anything resembling something that is not filled with right wing bias. This as ordered by the large media companies ownership.
While the fallout of these scandals is mass subscription cancellations, the reasonable thinking is that readers will take their business elsewhere. After all, for instance, the internet is a vast ocean of information and it’s not like readers are completely beholden to one or two sources. If they want to get an actual fact-based source like Freezenet, they can happily move over to a site like ours and get unfiltered knowledge from someone who has been doing this gig for nearly 20 years now.
This, however, is a major threat for far right wing extremists. The very idea that someone is out there publishing material that does not pass far right purity tests is a threat to their repeatedly debunked propaganda. So, what are they going to do about it? Apparently, the scary answer is to attack them through doxing tactics and more. According to a Slate article, the Heritage Foundation is currently working on a “identify and target” plan to go after people editing Wikipedia to say things they personally don’t like. It’s a frightening escalation on the war on free speech, but that’s what the report is saying:
Last month, the Jewish-American news site Forward reported a shocking scoop: The Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank behind Project 2025, is planning to “identify and target” Wikipedia editors. Through analyzing text patterns, usernames, and technical data and employing social-engineering tactics, Heritage aimed to reveal the identities of anonymous Wikipedia editors it believes are “abusing their position” on the platform.
In the culture of Wikipedia editing, it is common for individuals to use pseudonyms to protect their privacy and avoid personal threats. Revealing an editor’s personal information without their consent, a practice known as doxing, is a form of harassment that can result in a user’s being permanently banned from the site. Although this behavior is strictly prohibited by Wikipedia’s rules, Heritage has endorsed these scorched-earth tactics in response to what it perceives as antisemitism among certain editors covering the Israeli–Palestinian conflict on Wikipedia.
So, what are some of the methods being used? Apparently, one of the tools in the toolkit to go after Wikipedian’s is to use data brokers to target individuals:
Even if you take issue with how the site is currently framing the conflict, that doesn’t justify Heritage’s plan. Targeting Wikipedia editors personally, instead of debating their edits on the platform, marks a dangerous escalation. “The document [from Heritage] is sort of vague about what they would do once they ID a person,” journalist and Wikipedia editor Molly White told Forward, “but the things that come to mind are not great.”
The Heritage Foundation’s threats recall the methods used by pro–Chinese Communist Party editors in 2021, when a group called Wikimedians of Mainland China specifically targeted Hong Kong’s pro-democracy activists. These Chinese nationalist editors were displeased with the way the Hong Kong editors were documenting the protests against Beijing’s rule. Rather than continuing the discussion on Wikipedia’s talk pages (places for editors to chat with one another and debate proposed changes), the pro-CCP editors resorted to doxing and reporting their opponents’ real-life identities to the state police, leading some Hong Kong editors to be physically harmed. It seems that both the CCP and Heritage believe that if you can’t win an argument in the digital space of Wikipedia, it’s fair game to destroy that person’s life offline.
In the documents obtained by Forward, Heritage employees announced plans to use advanced data sources and tools from companies like Moody’s and Thomson Reuters to unmask Wikipedia editors. These powerful applications provide a virtual fire hose of real-time information, including location and address history, cross-referencing usernames, and fingerprinting a user based on writing style.
“Data broker tools can turn doxing into a laser-sharp targeting tool,” Sarah Lamdan, a lawyer and author of Data Cartels, told me.
To be clear, the fact that doxing is even being considered is asinine. What’s more, we are heading into the realm of criminal activity. As the Slate article notes, whether or not the activity is illegal, the methods being proposed are entirely unjustified. Further, if anything, data brokers should be shut down or heavily regulated, not weaponized to target perceived political rivals.
Either way, this is a marked escalation on the war on free speech, venturing into the realms of militarization. It doesn’t take much to say that this kind of thinking is wrong. On what planet does the idea of someone posting something you personally disagree with translate to “lets dox and harass that individual?” It should be condemned, but we live in the era of Trump extremism. If anything, there will be those that celebrate such an assault on free speech and others who will no doubt look at this as a role model idea moving forward. As a result, a part of me thinks that this kind of insanity is not entirely surprising, either.
Still, for those not part of the fascist propaganda industrial complex, this is a warning that it may be time to start looking at ways to protect yourself out there. As the rule of law fades away in the US, extremist activity will only be motivated to take hold. It’s a scary world we live in now.
