Delhi High Court summons Wikipedia in defamation case filed by ANI
ANI claims that Wikipedia’s description of it is defamatory. "Propaganda tool for the incumbent central government,” who is accused of distributing materials from various fake news websites and incorrectly reporting events, is what the Wiki page says about the news agency.
ADVERTISEMENT
On July 9, the Delhi High Court issued summons to Wikipedia in the ongoing defamation case that was filed by news agency ANI.
The summons and notice regarding ANI’s relief plea was filed by Justice Navin Chawla who scheduled the next hearing in the case for August 20.
ANI claims that Wikipedia’s description of it is defamatory. "Propaganda tool for the incumbent central government,” who is accused of distributing materials from various fake news websites and incorrectly reporting events, is what the Wiki page says about the news agency. Moreover, Wikipedia has restricted edits to the page.
Advocate Sidhant Kumar, on behalf of ANI said that Wikipedia selectively allows edits to ANI’s page. "They have closed my (ANI's) page for editing by anyone and can only be edited through their representatives,” he said.
Currently, the Wikipedia page for ANI includes multiple controversial comments. Some of which are:
ANI has been criticised for acting as a propaganda tool for the central government.
Under new management, ANI is accused of pursuing aggressive journalism aimed at maximum revenue, with poor treatment of employees.
A 2020 EU DisinfoLab investigation alleged ANI published anti-Pakistan and anti-China content sourced from pro-India fake news websites.
The news agency has been accused of misreporting events by fact checkers certified by the International Fact-Checking Network.
ANI was accused of falsely blaming Muslims for sexual assaults during the 2023 Manipur violence.
ANI argues that these comments are false and misleading and damage the news agency’s reputation. "This malicious conduct of the Defendants ex-facie establishes their ulterior motives of defaming Plaintiff by publishing false and misleading content against Plaintiff.”
While the court paid heed to ANI’s argument, it also mentioned that Wikipedia is entitled to its own opinion. The claims will be addressed in due course, the court said.
"At the end of day they are entitled to have their opinion whether they have backing of facts or not will be seen," the court stated.
