The French news outlet Le Point has launched a legal offensive against Wikipedia, accusing the online encyclopedia of a “meticulously co-ordinated” smear campaign orchestrated by left-wing activists.
The magazine claimed in an appeal published on February 20 that anonymous contributors had been distorting its image, labelling it as “Islamophobic” and “hard-right”, while citing left-leaning sources to back these allegations.
“For several months now, Le Point, like many others, has been the target of a meticulously coordinated smear campaign on Wikipedia,” it said.
“This operation is carried out by anonymous contributors using well-known methods.”
The publication’s editors, along with high-profile figures from across the French political spectrum, have signed a petition denouncing what they see as Wikipedia’s systematic bias.
The heart of the controversy lies in Le Point’s Wikipedia entry, which until recently described the publication as an “Islamophobic” and “hard-right” outlet known for “breaches of professional ethics”.
Such descriptions have since been removed but Le Point argued that its portrayal remained biased due to reliance on French left-wing media sources such as Libération, Mediapart, Arrêt sur Images, Acrimed, Politis — all of which have been highly critical of the magazine.
By contrast, Wikipedia’s entry on Mediapart primarily cited sources from Mediapart itself, raising further concerns about possible editorial double standards.
In response, Le Point has formally put the Wikimedia Foundation — Wikipedia’s parent organisation — on legal notice as of February 17, signalling its intent to fight what it said it viewed as an ideological smear campaign.
The collaborative encyclopedia is not taking the accusations lying down and and accused Le Point of intimidation.
In an open letter dated February 17, Wikipedia editors condemned the methods of Le Point journalist Erwan Seznec.
The letter detailed how an 18-year Wikipedia veteran known as “FredD” received an email from Seznec, warning him that Le Point was preparing to publish an article exposing his identity, position and employer.
“After contributing to the Wikipedia article on Le Point, FredD, a volunteer editor with over 30,000 contributions, was shocked to receive an email from Erwan Seznec stating: ‘We’re going to do an article on you, revealing your identity, position, and seeking an official reaction from [FredD’s supposed employer],’” the letter read.
Wikipedia claimed that was an attempt at intimidation.
Across the Atlantic, US billionaire Elon Musk has also criticised Wikipedia.
“Since legacy media propaganda is considered a ‘valid’ source by Wikipedia, it naturally simply becomes an extension of legacy media propaganda!” Musk wrote on X on February 21, urging users not to donate to the site.
Since legacy media propaganda is considered a “valid” source by Wikipedia, it naturally simply becomes an extension of legacy media propaganda! https://t.co/lwQlM51FRX
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 21, 2025
He reacted after his Wikipedia page was updated to reference a controversial hand gesture he made during US President Donald Trump’s inauguration.
These disputes have highlighted an increasingly contentious battle over Wikipedia’s role in shaping public narratives.
While the site maintained strict editing policies to prevent misinformation, concerns over systemic bias have persisted.
Wikipedia itself acknowledged that the demographics of its editors, who tend to come from specific regions and ideological backgrounds, could influence content and framing.
