Tucker Carlson thought he understood media bias.
But even he wasn’t prepared for what he found out about Wikipedia.
And Tucker Carlson just discovered Wikipedia’s hidden bias machine and it left him speechless.
Wikipedia co-founder exposes the site’s secret blacklist system
Wikipedia presents itself as the neutral encyclopedia of the internet where anyone can contribute and edit articles based on facts and consensus.
But the reality is far different from that rosy picture.
Larry Sanger, who co-founded Wikipedia, appeared on "The Tucker Carlson Show" to walk the host through what he called Wikipedia’s "perennial sources" page.
This page categorizes news sources based on how "reliable" Wikipedia considers them to be.
The results will shock anyone who believes Wikipedia operates without political bias.
"These are all green lit, fully green lit," Sanger explained as he showed Carlson which sources Wikipedia approves.
The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, The Nation, Mother Jones, and GLAAD all received Wikipedia’s stamp of approval as reliable sources.
Meanwhile, conservative outlets found themselves on the blacklist.
Conservative news outlets banned while liberal sources get the green light
Sanger then read off the "blacklisted" sources that Wikipedia refuses to accept as legitimate news sources.
The list included Breitbart News, the Daily Caller, The Epoch Times, Fox News, the New York Post, and The Federalist.
"So, you can’t use those as sources on Wikipedia," Sanger explained to a stunned Carlson.
The color-coding system makes Wikipedia’s bias crystal clear.
"Red means it’s blacklisted," Sanger said. "You cannot cite it as a source of facts, maybe as a source of opinion, but generally that works out."
Carlson read through the red-coded sources on his phone and discovered that outlets like Blaze News, Catholic-Hierarchy.org, CounterPunch, and the Daily Caller were all banned.
"That’s interesting," Carlson said while scrolling through the list. "Well, this is kind of incredible. Okay. I never hear about this! And we don’t know who made this decision?"
The revelation left Carlson genuinely amazed at the scope of Wikipedia’s institutional bias.
"This is so funny! This is amazing!" Carlson exclaimed while laughing at the absurdity of it all.
The real bias behind Wikipedia’s "neutral" facade
Wikipedia’s bias becomes even more obvious when you look at which sources they consider reliable for sensitive topics.
The site categorizes the Southern Poverty Law Center as "generally reliable on topics related to hate groups and extremism in the United States."
But the SPLC has a long track record of smearing conservative organizations as hate groups.
The SPLC falsely accused the late Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA of being a "hateful, white nationalist-friendly movement" despite Kirk repeatedly denouncing such ideologies.
TPUSA even appeared on the SPLC’s so-called "Hate Map" four months before Kirk’s tragic assassination on September 10th – simply for holding mainstream conservative positions.
The SPLC has also placed groups like Moms for Liberty and Gays Against Groomers on the same "Hate Map" alongside the Ku Klux Klan.
Their crime? Opposing radical LGBTQ ideology being pushed on children.
Meanwhile, Wikipedia considers ProPublica "generally reliable for all purposes" because of its "excellent reputation for fact-checking and accuracy."
But a Daily Caller News Foundation investigation revealed that most of the "ethics experts" ProPublica cited in hit pieces against Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito had donated to Democrat campaigns and left-wing causes.
Seven of the nine experts cited had collectively contributed more than $100,000 to Democrat campaigns, according to Federal Election Commission records.
ProPublica never disclosed these obvious conflicts of interest to their readers.
Wikipedia’s bias machine shapes what millions believe
Here’s what makes Wikipedia’s bias so dangerous.
Most people don’t realize that Wikipedia has created a systematic way to exclude conservative viewpoints from what it presents as neutral, factual information.
When someone searches for information about political topics, they’re getting a carefully curated leftist perspective – but it’s presented as objective truth.
The site processes billions of page views every month, making it one of the most influential sources of information in the world.
Students, journalists, and ordinary Americans rely on Wikipedia to understand current events and controversial topics.
But they’re getting propaganda disguised as encyclopedia entries.
Sanger’s willingness to expose this system shows how far Wikipedia has drifted from its original mission of creating a truly neutral knowledge base.
The platform has become another tool in the Left’s information warfare arsenal, and most people have no idea it’s happening.
¹ Jason Cohen, "’This Is Amazing!’: Tucker Carlson Stunned As Wikipedia Co-Founder Walks Him Through Site’s Blacklist," Daily Caller, September 29, 2025.
² Daily Caller News Foundation, "The Robots Coming For Your Job Will Bring Leftist Ideology With Them, Study Finds," Daily Caller, July 2023.
