Controversy over Muhammad Image puts Wikipedia in Tough Spot

 Email

By John Cantwell

More than 140,000 people have signed a petition demanding that Wikipedia remove an image of the prophet Muhammad from its site.

Wikipedia has taken a surprisingly hard-line stance in response, saying that the site is meant to be neutral and “is not censored for the benefit of any particular group” and that users can adjust their browser settings if they wish to not see the image.

People look to Wikipedia to set precedents for collaborative online content. In this respect,Wikipedia is setting a good example - content of this nature should be neutral, factually accurate, and unimpeded by the influence of special interest groups (although you could argue that Wikipedia is itself a special interest group, its interests being vested in, among other things, its editors’ understanding of “neutrality”).

At the same time, they’re wrestling with peoples’ religious beliefs. Anyone who remembers the outcry over some Danish political cartoons featuring Muhammad knows controversies like these don’t go away by themselves. (Ironically, the Wikipedia page about the cartoons shows them in their original form - and nobody is demanding that the cartoon be removed.) Combine this with the fact that online controversies have a tendency to boil over, and Wikipedia finds itself in a tough spot.

When dealing with unhappy online communities, it’s best to engage community members and listen to their complaints. To its credit, Wikipedia set up a discussion forum that allows people to discuss how to “best integrate images of Muhammad in the page.” Still, a notice at the top of the page states that users needn’t bother protesting the images themselves. In many ways, this is a closed discussion.

Ultimately Wikipedia’s hard-line stance is the right one - for them. It’ll be interesting to see if the situation escalates, and how Wikipedia responds.