

the post already links to a summary, but tl;dr
the state seeks to charge Meta for supporting grooming of minors, because adding chat encryption obstructed law enforcement. Criminalizing the design decision to add encryption might deter all companies.
Some of the most damaging evidence in both trials came from internal company documents where employees raised concerns about safety risks and discussed tradeoffs. […] the rational corporate response is to stop putting anything in writing. Stop doing risk assessments. Stop asking hard questions internally. […] That makes everyone less safe.






I don’t use such terms, but I’ll try a possible explanation: There is indeed a certain tendency. Articles are mostly written by speakers of that language. For example English articles by English-spreading editors tend to be influenced by western ideology. If you’d look at, I dunno, Russian Wikipedia, I’d assume it’s a similar situation.
It’s known that there are indeed paid government agents editing Wikipedia. But even those that are not are influenced by the Zeitgeist, which itself is informed by state propaganda. So we don’t need to assume intentional malice.
Ideally, people complaining about Wikipedia would have the time and skill to improve it. But that’s easier said than done.