Tag: censorship

Social Media Working to Protect ICE Clampdown in Minneapolis

There was a time, not terribly long ago, when the right claimed that the big social media companies weren’t just skewed to the left in terms of moderation, but that they were actually acting in the direct interests of the Democratic administration (House Judiciary Committee, 5/1/24).

When right-wing billionaire Elon Musk bought Twitter, eventually rebranding it as X, the right believed that he’d show the world that the popular site was a tool of the Democratic agenda (New Yorker, 1/11/23). The move increased Musk’s profile as a conservative crusader against social progress and economic populism before his brief stint as President Donald Trump’s federal jobs hatchet man in 2025 (Roosevelt Institute, 5/29/25).

Before a forced sale by its Beijing-based parent company, TikTok was attacked by both Democrats and Republicans because of its ownership, with both sides claiming that this not only gave the Chinese government the ability to spy on Americans, but also to skew political discourse away from Washington’s interests (FAIR.org, 11/13/23, 5/8/24, 1/3/25).

At Meta, founder Mark Zuckerberg quickly tried to distance his company from the notion that it acted in tandem with the Biden administration. Politico (8/26/24) reported:

Mark Zuckerberg says he regrets that Meta bowed to Biden administration pressure to censor content, saying in a letter that the interference was “wrong,” and he plans to push back if it happens again.

Zuckerberg told podcaster Joe Rogan (Joe Rogan Experience, 1/10/25) that the Biden administration had been “calling up the guys on our team and yelling at them and cursing and threatening repercussions if we don’t take down things that are true.” He asserted that Meta, and especially Facebook, “had gone too far in complying with such requests, and acknowledged that he and others at the company wrongly bought into the idea” (Axios, 1/10/25).

Keep reading

Wyoming Introduces First-Ever Foreign Censorship Shield Bill

Wyoming has taken a historic step to insulate American speech from foreign interference with the introduction of the Wyoming Guaranteeing Rights Against Novel International Tyranny and Extortion (GRANITE) Act, House Bill 0070, which would be the first US law designed to create a private right of action against foreign censorship enforcement.

Representative Daniel Singh introduced the bill, declaring that “foreign governments have decided they can threaten American citizens and American companies for speech that is protected by our Constitution…Wyoming is drawing a line in the sand.” The measure aims to establish Wyoming as a refuge for free expression and digital innovation, directly challenging what lawmakers describe as an escalating campaign of transnational censorship pressure.

The legislation provides that any Wyoming resident, business, or US person with servers in the state may sue foreign governments or international organizations that attempt to enforce censorship demands against them for First Amendment protected speech. Each violation could cost the offending entity at least $1 million or 10% of its US revenue, whichever is higher.

The GRANITE Act prohibits Wyoming courts and agencies from recognizing or enforcing foreign censorship judgments. It also forbids any state cooperation with such orders, including extradition requests or data demands linked to speech that is constitutionally protected in the US. Under the bill, no Wyoming authority may help a foreign state investigate, penalize, or prosecute individuals over lawful expression.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

Keep reading

Stockholm Politicians Call For Review Of SLAUGHTER TO PREVAIL Concert Over Propaganda Concerns

Stockholm politicians have raised concerns over an upcoming concert by hard rock band Slaughter To Prevail, following accusations that the group has spread Russian propaganda.

According to the Nordic Ukraine Forum, the band has engaged in messaging aligned with Russian propaganda narratives. In response, representatives from both the Moderate Party (M) and the Social Democrats (S) have reacted ahead of the band’s scheduled performance in Stockholm on Friday, January 30.

Opposition city councilor Christofer Fjellner (M) said he believes it would be inappropriate for the band to perform under the current circumstances. “I think it’s quite inappropriate. I don’t think a band that lends itself to Russian propaganda should be playing in Stockholm right now,” Fjellner told SVT Kulturnyheterna.

Stockholm’s Finance City Councilor Karin Wanngård (S) also commented on the situation, stating in a written response that the City of Stockholm is currently in dialogue with the concert organizer. According to Wanngård, the aim is to ensure that anti-democratic messages are not conveyed during the event.

Slaughter To Prevail previously performed in Gothenburg on Tuesday. Concert promoter Live Nation, which is organizing the Stockholm show, has declined to comment on SVT’s inquiries regarding the allegations. At the time of publication, the concert remains scheduled to proceed as planned.

Keep reading

Germany’s Censorship Frontier And The Rise Of Digital Control

Some achieve notoriety and fame by chance. Fortune may fall into one person’s lap, another may experience his ten minutes of public shine through a fluke rhetorical spark. In the case of the Minister‑President of Schleswig‑Holstein in Germany, however, this is a dubious honor.

In his appearance on Markus Lanz’s show on Germany’s state TV “ZDF”, CDU politician Daniel Günther slid into that revealing tone of small talk to which people are prone precisely when they believe themselves in a supposedly safe social environment – a place where no criticism is expected, no matter what leaves their lips.

What emerged during his guest spot on Lanz was a condemnable attitude toward the principle of free speech and toward critical media: the threat of censorship up to and including the blocking of individual platforms, including the portal Nius, reveals a profound ethical collapse. A growing, subtly operating apparatus of repression is now reaching us – a warning we should take seriously.

It was almost comical how Lanz, styled by public‑broadcasting elites as a star moderator, in tandem with the state‑aligned media sector repeatedly sought in the aftermath to rhetorically downplay Günther’s clearly articulated desire for censorship. Decontextualize, diffuse, and smother the real scandal with new waves of outrage like the Greenland debate – that’s how the media repair operation works.

Keep reading

Miami Beach police chief defends detectives’ visit to activist over Facebook post about mayor

Miami Beach Police Chief Wayne Jones issued a statement Friday explaining why detectives visited the home of a local political activist earlier this week following a social media comment about Mayor Steven Meiner.

“Given the real, ongoing national and international concerns surrounding antisemitic attacks and recent rhetoric that has led to violence against political figures,” Jones wrote that he “directed two of his detectives to initiate a brief, voluntary conversation regarding certain inflammatory, potentially inciteful false remarks made by a resident to ensure there was no immediate threat to the elected official or the broader community that might emerge as a result of the post.”

He went on to write that “the interaction was handled professionally and at no time did the mayor or any other official direct me to take action.”

The statement comes after Raquel Pacheco, a Miami Beach political activist and veteran who previously ran for city commission and a Democratic state Senate candidate, said Miami Beach detectives arrived at her home.

“He said, ‘We are here to talk to you about a Facebook comment’ and I said – ‘What? Is this really happening?” Pacheco told Local 10 News.

Pacheco had commented on a Facebook post by Meiner, who is Jewish, in which he described Miami Beach as “a safe haven for everyone,” contrasting it with New York City, which he said was “intentionally removing protections” for and “promoting boycotts” of Israeli and Jewish businesses.

Pacheco responded to the post by writing, “The guy who consistently calls for the death of all Palestinians, tried to shut down a theater for showing a movie that hurt his feelings, and REFUSES to stand up for the LGBTQ community in any way (even leaves the room when they vote on related matters) wants you to know that you’re all welcome here,” followed by three clown emojis.

She recorded the brief exchange with the detective who spoke with her about the post. In the video, Pacheco is heard asking, “Am I being charged with a crime?” and “So you are here to investigate a statement I allegedly made on Facebook?”

She later added, “This is freedom of speech. This is America, right?”

Pacheco said she believes the visit was politically motivated rather than a matter of public safety.

In the video, the detective is heard saying, “What we are just trying to prevent is somebody else getting agitated or agreeing with the statement, we are not saying if it’s true or not.”

“So that, to me, is a clear indication that people are not allowed to agree with anyone but the mayor and that is not how America works,” Pacheco said. “I don’t agree with him and I am going to continue to voice that.”

The encounter comes amid a national conversation about censorship and free speech, including recent debates sparked by the brief suspension of “Jimmy Kimmel Live.”

While the First Amendment does not apply to private companies, it does protect Americans from government interference in speech.

In the video, the detective advised Pacheco to “refrain from posting things like that,” telling her that her comment about Meiner’s views on Palestinians “can probably incite somebody to do something radical.”

Pacheco, who said she was simply “calling out” what she described as Meiner’s “hypocrisy,” said her comments do not meet that standard.

Keep reading

Too On Brand: School Purges 1984, Animal Farm, Lord of the Flies, and Others to Promote ‘Diversity’

You really can’t make things like this up. 

Seriously. Liberals may want to purge libraries of “wrongthink,” but you would expect that anybody with an IQ above room temperature could have figured out that tossing out more than half your books in a school library, including 1984 and Animal Farm, would be a bad look. 

But no. Not in Canada, apparently. And certainly not at the Thames Valley School District in London, Ontario. Out of a High School library of 18,000 books, 10,000 were “deselected” and tossed into the trash because they didn’t fit the vision of having an “inclusive” library. Presumably, that explains why they tossed out books by J.K. Rowling, which I assume were quite popular with the kids; she engages in wrongthink about gender, and needs to be purged. 

A London, Ontario, secondary school binned more than 10,000 library books between January and March this year under the Thames Valley District School Board’s “inclusive libraries revitalization project,” eliminating more than half of the school’s 18,000-book collection.

H.B. Beal’s library once held one of the largest collections in the board. Today, fewer than 8,300 books remain. The estimated value of the discarded materials exceeds $180,000.

Education Minister Paul Calandra moved quickly to halt further library culls while the ministry investigates the Beal revitalization project. A spokesperson for the ministry confirmed last week that “the minister has directed that all current and future library collection reviews be paused, pending further evaluation.”

According to board documentation, the project aims “to revitalize the collections of Thames Valley schools to ensure they are culturally responsive, reflect our diverse student population, and contain accurate and up-to-date information.” The project adds that it will focus on “deselecting texts with harmful images, messaging, slurs, and racial epithets to facilitate the safety and well-being of all students.”

Some of the books “deselected” blow your mind, not because it would surprise you that radical leftists would want to hide them, but because it makes their goals of purging the library of any ideological diversity so blatant. They literally purged books about…book banning. 

Keep reading

WEB WAR: After Shutting All Internet in the Country, Iranian Forces Are Now Jamming Starlink Service, While Users on the Ground Try to Bypass This New Censorship

It’s a technological ‘cat and mouse’ dispute.

As massive protests took to the streets of Iran for days on end, the Ayatollahs’ regime shut down the country’s internet completely.

That left the insurgents relying almost solely on the Starlink services made free by Elon Musk during the confrontations.

So the Iranian government started a two-pronged approach: begin cracking down and seizing all the Starlink terminals it could find, and at the same time, deploy military-grade level jammers to (so far, successfully) disrupt Starlink satellite service.

Both SpaceX engineers and Iranian protesters on the ground are now seeking ways to circumvent this censorship.

France24 reported:

“Iranian authorities cut the public’s access to the internet and telephone communications on January 8. The networks were later partially reinstated, but with severe restrictions. The Iranian regime has been facing a series of protests since late December. In an attempt to crush the movement, the Iranian government also tried to break the last international communication link available to Iranians: Starlink.

Starlink, which provides internet access through a constellation of satellites, was thought to be out of the Iranian authorities’ reach for censorship. However, in recent days, Starlink has been subject to a jamming campaign that has seriously impaired its use.”

Keep reading

MORE BETRAYAL: House Votes to KEEP Funding Globalist NGO Responsible for Global Censorship and Domestic Propaganda — 81 Republicans Side With Democrats to Kill Defund Push

In yet another stunning display of Uniparty betrayal, the House of Representatives has voted to continue funneling taxpayer dollars to the shadowy National Endowment for Democracy (NED) – a globalist NGO notorious for meddling in foreign elections, fueling censorship worldwide, and even pushing domestic propaganda right here at home.

By a lopsided 127–291 vote, lawmakers rejected an amendment offered by Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ) to prohibit $315 million in funding for the NED as part of the FY2026 spending package.

Following the vote, a disgusted Rep. Eli Crane took to X to vent his frustrations with the rot inside the halls of Congress.

“The swamp is real. But we did pass the Shower Act this week. I could use one after spending so much time in this awful place,” Crane wrote.

He followed up with a stinging rebuke of the 81 Republicans who turned their backs on the base:

“Tonight, the Uniparty rejected my amendment to defund NED. 81 ‘Republicans’ voted with Democrats to fund this rogue organization that fuels global censorship and domestic propaganda. We will keep fighting.”

Keep reading

Germany’s Latest War on Freedom

There is no censorship here in Germany,” according to Steffen Meyer, a top spokesman for the German government. In reality, Germans have freedom of speech except for ideas that politicians and government contractors and nonprofit activists don’t like. Germany is providing a road map for freedom that can be squashed throughout the Western world.

Germany was the scene of some of the 20th century’s worst tyranny but today’s German leaders have only noble intentions for oppression. Berlin’s Best and Brightest™ “improved” democracy by turning politicians into a privileged caste. After a conservative editor mocked a top German law enforcement official by posting a meme showing her holding a sign, “I hate freedom of opinion,” he was convicted and sentenced to seven months in jail for “abuse, slander or defamation against persons in political life.” The editor is on probation while the sentence is suspended but many other Germans have been locked up for similar offenses.

The US State Department Human Rights Report stated that German police “routinely raided homes, confiscated electronic devices, interrogated suspects and prosecuted individuals for the exercise of freedom of speech, including online.” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz personally filed almost 5,000 complaints against his online critics, sometimes resulting in police raids against people he accused.

The German media are gung-ho for government censorship of average Germans. TheNew York Times noted, “Authorities in Lower Saxony raid homes up to multiple times per month, sometimes with a local television crew in tow.”  The Times reported that in 2022, “Christian Endt, a journalist in Berlin whose coverage of Covid drew a steady stream of insults online, reached a breaking point. After an anonymous Twitter user had called him ‘stupid’ and mentally ill, he embarked on a mission to see if he could get the person prosecuted.”

The Twitter account didn’t have a real name but Endt used an image search of his picture and tracked it down to a small-business owner. Local prosecutors fined that guy more than a thousand dollars. Endt told the New York Times, “I was not even sure if what this guy wrote was a crime or not. In the end, I’m happy they did something about it and this person got a signal that there are some limits on free speech.” But is there no limit to the cowardliness of some German journalists? Publicly admitting that you ran crying to the authorities after some dweeb called you stupid and crazy makes a journalist unfit for writing about anything that offends anyone.   

Keep reading

Democrats Demand Apple and Google Ban X From App Stores

Apple and Google are under mounting political pressure from Democrats over X’s AI chatbot, Grok, after lawmakers accused the platform of producing images of women and allegedly minors in bikinis.

While the outrage targets X specifically, the ability to generate such material is not unique to one platform. Similar image manipulation and synthetic content creation can be found across nearly every major AI system available today.

Yet, the letter sent to Apple CEO Tim Cook and Google CEO Sundar Pichai by Senators Ron Wyden, Ben Ray Luján, and Ed Markey only asked the tech giants only about X and demanded that the companies remove X from their app stores entirely.

X is used by around 557 million users.

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

The lawmakers wrote that “X’s generation of these harmful and likely illegal depictions of women and children has shown complete disregard for your stores’ distribution terms.”

They pointed to Google’s developer rules, which prohibit apps that facilitate “the exploitation or abuse of children,” and Apple’s policy against apps that are “offensive” or “just plain creepy.”

Ignoring the First Amendment completely, “Apple and Google must remove these apps from the app stores until X’s policy violations are addressed,” the letter states.

Dozens of generative systems, including open-source image models that can’t be controlled or limited by anyone, can produce the same kinds of bikini images with minimal prompting.

The senators cited prior examples of Apple and Google removing apps such as ICEBlock and Red Dot under government pressure.

“Unlike Grok’s sickening content generation, these apps were not creating or hosting harmful or illegal content, and yet, based entirely on the Administration’s claims that they posed a risk to immigration enforcers, you removed them from your stores,” the letter stated.

Keep reading