Connect with us

International

Most Americans concerned about social media censorship this election cycle

Published

4 minute read

From The Center Square

By 

Just before the 2020 election, the FBI successfully pressured social media companies like Facebook and Twitter to censor or shadow ban articles about Hunter Biden’s laptop as Russian disinformation, although the laptop was later verified as valid and not Russian disinformation.

The majority of Americans are concerned that social media companies are censoring information ahead of the 2024 election, according to a new poll.

The Center Square Voter’s Voice poll, one of only six national tracking polls in the U.S., asked 2,290 likely voters: “Are you worried that social media companies are censoring content about the 2024 election right now?” The poll’s margin of error is +/- 2.1% for likely voters

The survey found that 61% of likely voters replied “yes” while only 25% said “no” and the rest are not sure.

Men were a bit more concerned, 64% compared to 57% of women.

The poll also found 66% of Hispanic respondents and 62% of white voters shared the concern.

A plurality of Black respondents shared the concern, 44%, compared to 40% who did not.

Republicans were more concerned, 78%, than Democrats, 43%, although a plurality of Democrats shared the concern.

Notably, 61% of Independents shared the worry that social media companies are censoring content.

The poll comes after Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook, admitted to the U.S. House Judiciary Committee in August that he regretted caving to government pressure to censor Americans during the previous election and the COVID-19 pandemic.

“I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it,” Zuckerberg said in a letter to the committee at the time.

The House Oversight Committee opened an inquiry into Google in August after reports that Google autocompleted searches of presidential assassination attempts for other past presidents but omitted Trump.

Google brushed aside concerns as technical issues, not intentional censorship.

The House Judiciary Committee also raised concerns about Facebook censoring the now-famous photo of a bloodied Trump pumping his fist after the assassination attempt, among other issues. A Meta representative acknowledged that was a mistake.

“Specifically, Meta’s AI assistant claimed, ‘the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump was a ‘fictional’ event,’ even as the chatbot ‘had plenty to say about Democratic rival Kamala Harris’ run for the White House,” House Oversight Chair Rep. James Coker, R-Ky., wrote, citing a New York Post article.

“When asked if the assassination on President Trump was fictional, Meta’s bot responded that there ‘was no real assassination attempt on Donald Trump,” the letter continued. “I strive to provide accurate and reliable information, but sometimes mistakes can occur.’ The bot further added, ‘[t]o confirm, there has been no credible report or evidence of a successful or attempted assassination of Donald Trump.’”

Just before the 2020 election, the FBI successfully pressured social media companies like Facebook and Twitter to censor or shadow ban articles about Hunter Biden’s laptop as Russian disinformation, although the laptop was later verified as valid and not Russian disinformation.

Reporting has also shown that social media companies, at the behest of the federal government, censored Americans’ posts about COVID-19 vaccines and related issues.

The presidential race is very close, which means any censorship in the last few weeks could make an impact.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Censorship Industrial Complex

US Under Secretary of State Slams UK and EU Over Online Speech Regulation, Announces Release of Files on Past Censorship Efforts

Published on

logo

By

Sarah Rogers’ comments draw a new line in the sand between America’s First Amendment and Europe’s tightening grip on online speech.

Speaking during an appearance on The Liz Truss Show, Rogers said Washington intends to respond to the UK’s communications regulator Ofcom after it sought to bring the website 4chan under its jurisdiction.
She said the situation “forced” the US to defend its constitutional protections, warning that “when British regulators decree that British law applies to American speech on American sites on American soil with no connection to Britain,” the matter can no longer be ignored.
Rogers called it “a perverse blessing” that the dispute is forcing a renewed transatlantic conversation about free expression, observing that “Britain and America did develop the free speech tradition together.”
Rogers announced that the State Department will soon publish a collection of previously unreleased internal emails and documents describing earlier US government involvement in social media moderation efforts.
The release is part of what she termed a “truth and reconciliation initiative” that will include material linked to the now-defunct Global Engagement Center, which she said had coordinated with outside organizations to identify content for takedown.
That operation was “immediately dismantled” after she assumed her current post.
She argued that foreign governments have moved from cooperation to coercion in their dealings with US companies. “Europe and the UK and other governments abroad are…trying to nullify the American First Amendment by enforcing against American companies and American speakers and American soil,” Rogers said, referring to the EU’s fine against X and Ofcom’s recent enforcement campaigns.
On domestic policy, she criticized the UK’s Online Safety Act, saying that it is being sold as child protection legislation but in practice functions as a speech control measure.
“These statutes are just censoring adult political speech is not the best way to protect kids and it’s probably the worst way,” she said.
Rogers noted that under such laws, even parliamentary remarks about criminal networks could be censored if regulators deem them harmful.
Turning to Ofcom’s ongoing 4chan case, Rogers said its legal position effectively claims authority over purely American websites.
She offered a hypothetical: “I could go set up a website in my garage…about American political controversies…and Ofcom’s legal position nonetheless is that if I run afoul of British content laws, then I have to pay money for the British government.”
Rogers said she expects the US government to issue a response soon.
Throughout the interview, Rogers framed the current wave of global online regulation as an effort to suppress what she called “chaotic speech” that emerges with every major communications shift.
“People panic and they want to shove that innovation back in the bottle,” she said, warning that such attempts have “never worked.”
Her remarks mark one of the strongest rebukes yet from a senior American official toward the growing European model of compelled content moderation.
Rogers suggested that this model not only undermines open debate but also sets a precedent for governments worldwide to police political speech beyond their borders.
Continue Reading

Business

Largest fraud in US history? Independent Journalist visits numerous daycare centres with no children, revealing massive scam

Published on

A young journalist has uncovered perhaps the largest fraud scheme in US history. 

He certainly isn’t a polished reporter with many years of experience, but 23 year old independent journalist Nick Shirley seems to be getting the job done. Shirley has released an incredible video which appears to outline fraud after fraud after fraud in what appears to be a massive taxpayer funded scheme involving up to $9 Billion Dollars.

In one day of traveling around Minneapolis-St. Paul, Shirley appears to uncover over $100 million in fraudulent operations.

Continue Reading

Trending

X