Justice Rebecca Bradley, a conservative member of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, has recently been under scrutiny for making edits to her own Wikipedia entry to improve her public image. Justice Bradley, who has been the subject of controversy for her loaded opinions, was caught making these edits by a keen-eyed observer who noticed the username on her Wikipedia edits was the same as the handle used for her personal email.
An article by Newsweek, as referenced in the misadventure, describes how the truth of her edits was revealed on Twitter. User “@arizonasunblock” shared that Justice Bradley was involved in an “edit war” on her Wikipedia page under an anonymous username which also appeared in her personal email. This discovery led to an examination of her actions and motivations.
Justice Bradley’s controversial past includes a string of opinions and public statements that have drawn criticism. For instance, she authored columns during her university years suggesting that homosexual sex resulted in death, and she compared abortion procedures to the horrors of the Holocaust and slavery.
Most notoriously, Justice Bradley equated COVID-19 health restrictions to the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. After the comparison was criticized, she defended her stance and cited her intention to examine the limits of government authority during times of crisis.
Unhappy with the public’s recollection of her controversial past, Justice Bradley decided to take matters into her own hands and alter the record of her life and career on Wikipedia. By modifying phrases and words to downplay the impact of her statements, she seemingly hoped to obscure harsh criticism and negative associations related to her views.
However, Justice Bradley’s changes were swiftly detected and reversed by the Wikipedia editorial team. Unperturbed, she maintained that the “liberal media” had warped her record and that her actions were an attempt to correct false accusations.
Despite her efforts to alter her digital footprint, her own contributions to the discussion continue to shape her public image. Consequently, these actions serve as a reminder for public figures on the importance of discretion and integrity when it comes to managing their online profiles, and the potential consequences of attempting to alter historical records.
The full incident and Justice Bradley’s commentary is detailed here.