UK PR firm under fire for allegedly 'Wikilaundering' client's Wikipedia pages.
A prominent public relations company, founded by Keir Starmer's former communications chief Tim Allan, has been accused of manipulating Wikipedia pages to improve its clients' reputations. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) claims that Portland Communications outsourced editing services for some high-profile clients, including the state of Qatar, between 2016 and 2024.
According to the investigation, a network of editors allegedly controlled by a contractor working on behalf of Portland made numerous changes to Wikipedia pages. These edits often buried critical reporting or relegated unwelcome information about clients under descriptions of their philanthropic work. The practice, known as "Wikilaundering," is considered a breach of professional codes of conduct and violates the terms of use set out by the Wikimedia Foundation.
The TBIJ found evidence of edits made in support of Portland's clients, including Qatar, which aimed to improve its image ahead of the 2022 World Cup. In another case, Portland allegedly hired a web consultant to alter information about a failed philanthropy project linked to one of its other clients.
Several former employees of Portland have come forward to confirm that their colleagues did indeed commission edits on Wikipedia pages, often using contractors like Radek Kotlarek's Web3 Consulting. While there is no suggestion that Allan personally ordered these changes or was aware of them, his firm has a history of making Wikipedia edits and contracting out for such services.
The Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR) has stated that intentional deceit and anonymous activities are breaches of professional codes of conduct. The incident has raised concerns about the influence of PR firms on online platforms like Wikipedia and the potential for manipulation by powerful interests.
As Allan navigates his new role as Downing Street's executive director of communications, critics have warned that his attempts to reshape access to the Prime Minister's daily briefings could further restrict scrutiny and transparency.
A prominent public relations company, founded by Keir Starmer's former communications chief Tim Allan, has been accused of manipulating Wikipedia pages to improve its clients' reputations. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) claims that Portland Communications outsourced editing services for some high-profile clients, including the state of Qatar, between 2016 and 2024.
According to the investigation, a network of editors allegedly controlled by a contractor working on behalf of Portland made numerous changes to Wikipedia pages. These edits often buried critical reporting or relegated unwelcome information about clients under descriptions of their philanthropic work. The practice, known as "Wikilaundering," is considered a breach of professional codes of conduct and violates the terms of use set out by the Wikimedia Foundation.
The TBIJ found evidence of edits made in support of Portland's clients, including Qatar, which aimed to improve its image ahead of the 2022 World Cup. In another case, Portland allegedly hired a web consultant to alter information about a failed philanthropy project linked to one of its other clients.
Several former employees of Portland have come forward to confirm that their colleagues did indeed commission edits on Wikipedia pages, often using contractors like Radek Kotlarek's Web3 Consulting. While there is no suggestion that Allan personally ordered these changes or was aware of them, his firm has a history of making Wikipedia edits and contracting out for such services.
The Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR) has stated that intentional deceit and anonymous activities are breaches of professional codes of conduct. The incident has raised concerns about the influence of PR firms on online platforms like Wikipedia and the potential for manipulation by powerful interests.
As Allan navigates his new role as Downing Street's executive director of communications, critics have warned that his attempts to reshape access to the Prime Minister's daily briefings could further restrict scrutiny and transparency.
. I mean, how can you just manipulate Wikipedia pages for your clients? It's not like it's a subtle thing - they're basically trying to cover up some stuff and make themselves look better 
. And the fact that several former employees are coming forward to say they did this stuff too is pretty damning. 
. I mean, we're talking about some big-name clients like Qatar - that's serious business 
. And the fact that the Chartered Institute of Public Relations is saying that this is a breach of professional codes of conduct? Yeah, that's not surprising 
.
I'm just waiting for the fallout on Tim Allan, former communications chief and now Downing Street big shot. The more power he gains, the more questionable things will happen, if you ask me 
with my family and I'm still bouncy from it lol. Anyway, I was thinking about how Wikipedia is like this huge, shared library of knowledge that's totally open to anyone... but apparently some PR firm is trying to 'improve' people's reputations by altering pages on it? It's crazy to think about how some folks are willing to bend the rules just to make themselves look good 
. And I was reading about this one charity that got shut down because of a PR debacle, and I'm like... isn't transparency supposed to be a thing in non-profits? 
. Outsource Wikipedia edits? That's like hiring someone to write your biography...or not! 
. I guess you could say Portland Communications is trying to clean up their PR image, but this stinks 
. Who's holding them accountable for all this 'Wikilaundering' nonsense? The CIPR says intentional deceit is off-limits, but what about corporate espionage? Where does the line get drawn here? This whole thing feels super murky...
. I'm not saying there aren't any good people working in PR, but you've got to wonder who's really pulling the strings here 
.
. one PR firm does some dodgy edits on wikipedia, and suddenly it's not an isolated incident anymore 
. i mean, can you imagine if the gov was doing stuff like this? the outrage would be thru the roof 
. newsflash: that doesn't make it okay 
. and now tim allan is in charge of comms at downing street? 
. And I feel bad for the Wikimedia Foundation and all the hard work they do to keep Wikipedia accurate and trustworthy.
.
it's like they have a puppet controlling the whole government thing. It's all about manipulation and control, if you ask me. 
but at the same time, I'm all about keeping Wikipedia pages factual and unbiased, you know? It's like, if they're paying people to make changes, that's just not cool 
. But then again, who doesn't want a good PR firm on their side? Maybe it's just a free market thing, where everyone tries to game the system 
. But on the other hand, it's like, shouldn't PR firms just stick to spin doctoring instead of trying to shape online narratives? Ugh, I'm so confused 
! Like, how do you even hide manipulation in plain sight? A PR firm basically pays people to alter Wikipedia pages to spin their clients' image? It's like a big web of deceit 
. And the fact that some former employees came forward to say they did it too... it just gets worse and worse.
. I mean, who tries to hide information on Wikipedia? It's like, isn't that just a public record at its core?
. I guess you could say my faith in institutions is shot 
. But hey, maybe we can all use this as an opportunity to talk about transparency and accountability? 
what's next? paying reddit commenters to make certain posts go viral or something? 
It's just not right. And now Tim Allan's got a new job at the PM's office? That's just peachy 
. He must've learned his lesson... NOT.