Censorship Industrial Complex
Jim Jordan Exposes Biden’s Censorship-Industrial Complex
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By TOM HEBERT
“Internal talking points prepared by Amazon,” says the report, “included the question: ‘Is the [Biden] Admin asking us to remove books, or are they more concerned about search results/order (or both).’”
High-ranking Biden White House operatives coerced Big Tech companies into censoring posts critical of the Biden administration or those that spread so-called “misinformation” about COVID-19. A blockbuster new report from the House Judiciary Committee, which is chaired by Rep. Jim Jordan, exposes how the Biden administration weaponized Big Tech against conservatives.
“The report,” the committee said when it released it, “details the months-long campaign by the Biden White House to coerce large companies, namely Facebook, Google, and Amazon, to censor books, videos, posts, and other content online. By the end of 2021, Facebook, YouTube, and Amazon changed their content moderation policies in ways that were directly responsive to criticism from the Biden Administration.”
This report is the result of a multi-year investigation by the Judiciary Committee’s Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. The evidence, including tens of thousands of emails and other non-public documents, shows a disturbing pattern of Biden officials pressuring Big Tech companies into censoring Americans online.
Shortly after Biden’s inauguration in 2021, then-White House Digital Director Rob Flaherty began haranguing top Facebook officials for more detail on their policies for taking down COVID-19 related posts. “In February 2021,” says the report, “Facebook increased its censorship of anti-vaccine content as well as the lab leak theory of the origin of the virus because of ‘tense conversations with the new [Biden] Administration’ and as part of an effort to be responsive to the Biden White House’s exhortations to ‘do more’ to combat alleged misinformation.”
As 2021 progressed, the White House demanded to know what Facebook was doing to censor “borderline content,” posts that did not violate Facebook’s content moderation policies but were nevertheless objectionable to Biden officials. “Facebook would meet again with the Biden White House on March 12, 2021, to discuss how it was approaching ‘borderline content,’ that is, content that did not violate its policies,” says the report.
“Facebook walked through its policies and enforcement practices for violative and borderline content,” it says. “But call notes reveal that throughout the meeting, Flaherty continued to ask about the removal and reduction of content above all else.”
Unsatisfied with Facebook’s unwillingness to “play ball,” Flaherty and the White House played hard ball. On July 16, 2021, a reporter asked Biden: “On Covid misinformation, what’s your message to platforms like Facebook?” Biden responded: “They’re killing people.”
In response to the intense pressure from the White House, Facebook went on to change their content moderation policies and censored posts about vaccine hesitancy and the lab-leak theory.
Facebook was not the only social media platform that Biden officials pressured. In April 2021, Flaherty reached out to YouTube with a litany of questions about YouTube’s efforts to censor borderline content. “Flaherty’s email was particularly focused on how YouTube handled non-violative ‘borderline’ content,” says the report. “These requests were prefaced by stating the Biden White House wanted ‘to be sure that you have a handle on vaccine hesitancy generally and are working toward making the problem better’ and that this ‘is a concern that is shared at the highest (and I mean highest) level of the [White House].’”
After Flaherty succeeded in making YouTube change its content moderation policies “to remove content that questioned the safety or efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines,” other Biden bureaucrats started to pester YouTube employees to clamp down on other content. In March 2022, according to the committee report, former Biden advisor Tim Wu asked for a meeting with Google employees to discuss “Russian misinformation/disinformation” and “airline competition.”
Another staffer communicated with YouTube about abortion-related content. “On July 14, 2022, YouTube Government Affairs staff contacted White House personnel to brief them on ‘updates related to addressing reproductive health misinformation on YouTube,’ to which White House staff responded, saying that they were ‘specifically interested in abortion,’” said the report.
Biden officials clearly sought to censor content they perceived as politically damaging to Biden.
The report also shows the White House’s obsession suppressing books that they disagreed with. In March 2021, the Biden White House emailed an Amazon executive “asking to have a discussion regarding the ‘high levels of propaganda and misinformation and disinformation at Amazon.’”
“Internal talking points prepared by Amazon,” says the report, “included the question: ‘Is the [Biden] Admin asking us to remove books, or are they more concerned about search results/order (or both).’”
There are two important takeaways from this report.
One, the Biden administration sought to impose a censorship regime through Big Tech to benefit the president politically.
Two, Congress should act to prevent future government-directed censorship of American speech. There are numerous bills that would address this problem. The House passed the “Protecting Speech from Government Interference Act” last year, legislation that would ban bureaucrats from advocating for censorship of viewpoints. The “Free Speech Protection Act” imposes penalties on bureaucrats who censor speech, and the “Censorship Accountability Act” would allow Americans to sue bureaucrats who violate their First Amendment rights.
The Biden administration has displayed an appalling amount of contempt for American free speech. Exposing Biden’s censorship-industrial complex is an important first step toward ensuring that unelected bureaucrats do not have a veto over what we say online.
Tom Hebert is Director of Competition and Regulatory Policy at Americans for Tax Reform and executive director of the Open Competition Center.
Censorship Industrial Complex
Canada’s justice minister confirms ‘hate crimes’ bill applies to online content
From LifeSiteNews
Individuals could be criminally charged for social media posts or other online content deemed offensive by the government under the Combating Hate Act.
Canadian Justice Minister Sean Fraser admitted that his new “hate crime” bill would indeed allow a person to be criminally charged for social media posts deemed offensive by the government.
Recently asked about Bill C-9, the Combating Hate Act, Fraser said the bill would indeed apply to certain online content that involves the “willful promotion of hatred.”
“Generally speaking, the law will apply equally online as it does in real communities,” he said, adding, “just in the limited circumstances where there is the willful promotion of hatred against someone.”
As reported by LifeSiteNews, Bill C-9 has been blasted by constitutional experts as allowing empowered police and the government to go after those it deems have violated a person’s “feelings” in a “hateful” way.
Bill C-9 was brought forth in the House of Commons on September 19 by Fraser. The Liberals have boasted that the bill will make it a crime for people to block the entrance to, or intimidate people from attending, a church or other place of worship, a school, or a community center. The bill would also make it a crime to promote so-called hate symbols and would, in effect, ban the display of certain symbols such as the Nazi flag.
While being questioned by Conservative MP Andrew Lawton about Bill C-9, Fraser was asked if the new law would “affect what people can say and write on the internet” and also if people could be retroactively punished for online comments made today.
In reply, Fraser said, “The only circumstance where you could imagine some online comment attracting scrutiny under this law would attach to behaviour that is criminal today but would be punished less severely.”
He said that “(t)he willful promotion of hate is a crime today, but we want to recognize a distinct charge where that same behaviour uses certain symbols of hate to bring a higher degree of culpability.”
John Carpay of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) has blasted Bill C-9 as something that would “empower police” and the government to go after those it deems have violated a person’s “feelings” in a “hateful” way.
Also, as reported by LifeSiteNews, Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis called out the hypocrisy of Bill C-9 for being silent regarding rising “Christian hate.”
Lewis has warned before that Bill C-9 will open the door for authorities to prosecute Canadians’ speech deemed “hateful possibly.”
Carpay also lamented how the bill mentions “rising antisemitism” but says nothing about the arson attacks on Catholic and Christian churches plaguing Canada.
“Anti-Catholic hate is obviously not on the minister’s radar. If it were, he would have mentioned it when introducing the Combating Hate Act,” Carpay wrote.
Since taking power in 2015, the Liberal government has introduced numerous new bills that, in effect, censor internet content and restrict people’s ability to express their views.
Now that Trump is running Washington, Conservative thinkers must ponder a new-found appreciation for silencing speech they don’t like.
From StosselTV
War on Words: Both Parties Try to Silence Speech They Don’t Like
Donald Trump, before he was reelected, said he’d end government censorship. But now that he’s in office? He calls speech he doesn’t like “illegal.”
Free Speech should be a bedrock American value, no matter who’s in office. After the murder of Charlie Kirk, Republicans, who once complained about censorship, became censors. Democrats suddenly flip-flopped. All politicians should remember, the way to fight speech you don’t like, is with more speech, not censorship.
After 40+ years of reporting, I now understand the importance of limited government and personal freedom.
——————————————
Libertarian journalist John Stossel created Stossel TV to explain liberty and free markets to young people.
Prior to Stossel TV he hosted a show on Fox Business and co-anchored ABC’s primetime newsmagazine show, 20/20.
Stossel’s economic programs have been adapted into teaching kits by a non-profit organization, “Stossel in the Classroom.” High school teachers in American public schools now use the videos to help educate their students on economics and economic freedom. They are seen by more than 12 million students every year.
———
To make sure you receive the weekly video from Stossel TV, sign up here: https://www.johnstossel.com/#subscrib…
———
From Underdog to Top Broodmare
Trans Mountain executive says it’s time to fix the system, expand access, and think like a nation builder
Trump Admin Establishing Council To Make Buildings Beautiful Again
Is The Latest Tiger Woods’ Injury Also A Death Knell For PGA Champions Golf?
B.C. would benefit from new pipeline but bad policy stands in the way
Canada surrenders control of future health crises to WHO with ‘pandemic agreement’: report
Back Door Carbon Tax: Goal Of Climate Lawfare Movement To Drive Up Price Of Energy
-
Business17 hours ago
Trans Mountain executive says it’s time to fix the system, expand access, and think like a nation builder
-
Alberta2 days agoCoutts border officers seize 77 KG of cocaine in commercial truck entering Canada – Street value of $7 Million
-
Business2 days agoThe painful return of food inflation exposes Canada’s trade failures
-
Alberta1 day agoPremier Smith sending teachers back to school and setting up classroom complexity task force
-
Alberta1 day agoThousands of Albertans march to demand independence from Canada
-
Addictions19 hours agoThe Shaky Science Behind Harm Reduction and Pediatric Gender Medicine
-
Business2 days agoOttawa Bought Jobs That Disappeared: Paying for Trudeau’s EV Gamble
-
Crime1 day agoSuspect caught trying to flee France after $100 million Louvre jewel robbery