Tag: censorship

Senator Ron Johnson Demands Meta Releases Records on COVID-19 Vaccine Injury Censorship

Senator Ron Johnson, Chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, has escalated his scrutiny of Meta’s alleged suppression of COVID-19 vaccine injury discussions, demanding that CEO Mark Zuckerberg release internal records detailing Facebook’s content moderation practices.

More: Facebook and YouTube Censored Victims of AstraZeneca COVID Vaccine

In a letter dated February 4, 2025, Johnson specifically questioned Facebook’s removal of vaccine injury support groups, including A Wee Sprinkle of Hope, which was described in the book Worth a Shot? as the largest such group in the world before it was shut down just five days after Johnson’s June 28, 2021, roundtable with vaccine-injured individuals.

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

The letter also reiterated claims that Facebook engaged in shadow banning, appended warning labels to users’ posts about vaccine injuries, and even censored private messages. One particularly tragic case cited in Worth a Shot? described a woman who took her own life after her private messages seeking help from fellow vaccine-injured individuals allegedly went unnoticed due to Facebook’s restrictions on message visibility.

Keep reading

Trump Cracks Down on Pro-Censorship CISA, Puts Key Officials on Leave

President Donald Trump appears to be making good on a number of campaign promises, including those moves aimed at ending practices that, during the previous administration, resulted in wide-scale censorship collusion between the government and large tech companies.

According to a number of insider documents, lawsuits, and Congressional investigations, the reason for this “joint work” in flagging, removing, deplatforming, and committing other forms of free speech violations was most often justified as the need to combat “misinformation” – usually election, or Covid-related.

But critics have for years insisted that the actual result was First Amendment violations, through the exertion of control over speech and therefore public opinion ahead of an election (such as the discrediting of the Hunter Biden laptop story as “misinformation” and an example of supposed foreign interference).

And, the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) by all accounts “excelled” at this work.

Keep reading

EU Launches “Democracy Shield” Initiative to Tighten Controls on Tech Giants and Enforce “Hate Speech” Compliance

EU’s new “European Union Democracy Shield (EUDS)” committee, which aims to impose more control over tech giants now perceived as aligned with US President Trump, and promote their compliance with “hate speech” laws while imposing more “fact-checking” has gained its chair – French member of European Parliament (MEP) and French President Macron-allied politician Nathalie Loiseau.

The EUDS initiative was first unveiled by EU Commission’s Executive VP Henna Virkkunen, and Loiseau appears to have been given the job in true unelected-Brussels-bureaucracy fashion: this was known before a vote on her nomination took place.

“Nathalie Loiseau will be elected this evening at 6 pm,” it was announced early on Monday by La Lettre (this effective appointment has in the meantime been confirmed).

And it gets worse – another French MEP, Virginie Joron, said that Loiseau had announced she would be elected “the weekend before” those electing her had a chance to vote.

Stalin could never.

However – given the role that “Democracy Shield” is expected to play, namely, control speech/opinions, this odd process is seen by some as basically symbolic of the body’s purpose – albeit it happens to be one that is “denying democracy.”

Loiseau is a member of the European Parliament’s Renew group, whereas Joron is from the Patriots for Europe (PfE); the manner in which the EUDS selected its chief was particularly offensive to the latter since the PfE had hoped to have its own candidate, Antonio Tanger Correa – but that was rendered pointless by the manner in which Loiseau was appointed.

Correa denounced it as a “sham democracy” while Joron slammed the European Parliament’s “theater” where one can get “elected” before the vote.

Keep reading

UK Home Secretary Signals Tougher Online Censorship Beyond Current Censorship Laws

Judging by the most recent statements made by UK Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, the government feels it will have to implement even more stringent speech-restrictive measures than those contained in the sweeping and controversial censorship law, the Online Safety Act.

Appearing on a BBC political talk show, Cooper kept beating the now well-established drum the ruling Labour has gone for in the wake of last year’s Southport killings, and subsequent mass protests – namely, to try to portray social media companies as somehow “a part of the crime,” which is verbatim how the cabinet minister put it.

One of the recurring themes these last weeks, since the Southport trial saw its conclusion, has been that tech companies are “morally responsible” for not deleting (that request came only last week) one of the violent videos viewed by the killer, Axel Rudakubana.

This request was made even though said companies are under no legal obligation to do that, until the spring of this year and the start of the enforcement of some parts of the Online Safety Act.

The stage set that way, Cooper’s logic – or lack thereof – goes like this: “We are being clear that we are prepared to go further if the Online Safety Act measures are not working as effectively as we need them to do,” she told the host, Laura Kuenssberg.

There is no way to predict how social media firms will act once they are under obligation to remove certain types of content – and yet Cooper is already threatening to make the Online Safety Act even worse.

Keep reading

EU’s “Disinformation” Code Becomes Mandatory Under Censorship Law, Platforms Preemptively Enforce Rules Ahead of German Elections

The inevitable slide of the EU’s voluntary — at least in name — disinformation code (the 2022 version) into mandatory rules integrated into the Digital Services Act (DSA) censorship law will become enforceable this July.

But just in time for Germany’s early elections, scheduled for the last week of February, large platforms – Google, Meta Platforms, Microsoft, TikTok, Snapchat, LinkedIn, and X – participated in a “stress test” of their readiness to investigate risks to “civic discourse and electoral process” related to that vote.

This is taken by some reports to mean that although the voluntary code will become obligatory in the summer, the integration before February 23 in Germany means that platforms with more than 45 million users in the EU will implement “disinformation” rules, acting a “voluntary” basis one last time – in a bid “to avoid future legal risks.”

The election campaign in Germany has been marred by contentious attempts by those still in power to discredit and even censor the rising opposition. This is happening both through domestic institutions and by “delegating” some of such efforts to the EU.

The “stress test” done in late January and the reports around code integration timeline fit well in the overall trend. It was conducted by the European Commission and Germany’s digital services coordinator.

The code’s main purpose is to get signatories to step up content “moderation” – which critics see as code word for censorship, but which the EU, along with the DSA, explains as a way to combat illegal content and “protect users.”

Keep reading

FBI Nominee Kash Patel Vows to End Censorship Collusion, Slams Wiretaps, and Pledges Section 230 Work

FBI Director nominee Kash Patel’s Senate confirmation hearing on Thursday was a chance to learn about the direction the agency would take after a number of years filled with controversies linked to online censorship.

Patel addressed several of these issues, including the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop stories and the FBI’s role in the scandal – which he said would not repeat going forward.

Patel also spoke against the FBI attempting to pressure Big Tech to get these companies to censor content, as well as against wiretapping political candidates and their staff – but also pledged to work with Senator Richard Blumenthal in order to bring potentially controversial changes to Section 230 that could jeopardize end-to-end encryption.

Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican, was on the confirmation hearing panel and recalled that in October 2020 – a month before the election – the FBI was among those who worked to falsely present Hunter Biden laptop story as “Russian disinformation.”

Keep reading

World Economic Forum Panel Praises EU Censorship Law

One of this year’s World Economic Forum (WEF) panels brought together publishers, a French minister, and a UK think tank previously involved in US State Department-funded censorship of Americans, who praised the EU’s controversial Digital Services Act (DSA) while railing against “misinformation.”

French Minister Delegate for Artificial Intelligence and Digital Technology Clara Chappaz spoke about the DSA as a solution to the “problem” presented by free speech on the internet.

Chappaz and another speaker, the CEO of the UK think tank – the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) – defended the law as not being a censorship tool but “merely” making what is illegal offline also illegal online.

Yet the French official remarked that it requires platforms to introduce measures reducing “the systemic risks” tied to “misinformation.” And this ends up providing a mechanism for censorship of whatever the authorities decide to consider “misinformation.”

Chappaz also spoke about an age verification law that was introduced in France last week, the pretext being preventing minors from accessing adult sites.

Keep reading

US Government Agencies Caught Censoring and ‘Block-Listing’ The Gateway Pundit and Others with the Help of Radical UK Anti-Conservative Censorship Group

Imran Awan, the CEO at The Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), bragged about getting conservative news orgs such as the Gateway Pundit, the Federalist, and Zero Hedge reported to social media AND demonetized! Especially from Google Ads, a prominent advertiser online.

According to Bad Kitty Restless Development is funded by numerous big money leftist groups and government agencies, including:

  • Obama Foundation
  • USAID (United States Agency for International Development)
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
  • Clinton Health Initiative
  • Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
  • United Nations
  • The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA)
  • Norwegian Agency for Exchange Cooperation (NOREC)
  • Irish Aid
  • Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO)
  • Ford Foundation
  • Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA)

Keep reading

TikTok and the Freedom of Speech

“Congress shall make no law …abridging the freedom of speech or of the press…”
~ First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

During the oral argument before the Supreme Court in the famous Pentagon Papers case, a fascinating colloquy took place between Justice William O. Douglas and the lawyer for the government. The case was about whether the government could prevent The New York Times and The Washington Post from publishing secret documents that demonstrated that American generals had been misleading President Lyndon Johnson and he had been lying to the American public during the Vietnam War.

The documents had been stolen by Daniel Ellsberg, a civilian employee of the Department of Defense, in an act of great personal courage and constitutional fidelity, and then delivered to both newspapers. Two federal judges had enjoined the newspapers from publishing the documents, and the Supreme Court was hearing appeals by the newspapers.

When Justice Douglas asked the government lawyer if the phrase “no law” in the First Amendment literally means no law, he was unable to answer. The court found his mumbo jumbo reasoning so telling that it actually published the transcript of the Q and A in the court’s opinion itself – something it had not done before in modern times nor since.

The court ruled in that landmark case that freedom of speech and the right to know what the government is doing and the right to consult whatever source one chooses when forming an opinion each trump the government’s concerns for protection of state secrets. Thus, it matters not how the media obtains information; if it is material to the public interest, the media may publish it, without fear of civil or criminal liability.

The Pentagon Papers case was the high watermark for the freedom of speech: Freedom trumps safety. But the court studiously avoided answering Justice Douglas’ question about no law. If the Constitution means what it says, then no law literally means no law, and thus all sorts of legislation about speech – from defamation to treason to silencing TikTok – is unconstitutional. But if no law doesn’t really mean no law, then what does it mean?

Regrettably, today, no law means whatever the court says it means. That’s what happened last week when the court upheld congressional legislation silencing TikTok.

Keep reading

TikTok Officially Banned in the United States – President Trump Expected to Reinstate App

TikTok has been officially banned following a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to remove the app’s availability in the United States.

This comes after a Friday decision upholding a law forcing China-owned ByteDance to divest from TikTok by Sunday or face a ban from U.S. app stores.

President Trump previously asked the Supreme Court to pause the ban so his administration could be given “the opportunity to pursue a political resolution of the questions at issue in the case.”

Trump also said in an interview with NBC that he will “likely” give Tiktok a 90-day extension when he takes office.

Per NBC:

“I think that would be, certainly, an option that we look at. The 90-day extension is something that will be most likely done, because it’s appropriate. You know, it’s appropriate. We have to look at it carefully. It’s a very big situation,” Trump said in the phone interview.

“If I decide to do that, I’ll probably announce it on Monday,” he said.

Keep reading