Tag: censorship

Rep. Adam Schiff and Other Democrats Demand Social Media Companies Censor “Misinformation” and “Disinformation” This Month

In the US, the Democrats continue with their sustained efforts to pressure major social media platforms, now about a month ahead of the presidential election.

The Twitter Files give some idea about what may be happening behind closed doors (if previous campaigns/elections are any indication), but this is about public pressure. This time, Congressman Adam Schiff’s turn is to “demand action” from companies behind social media.

Meta (Instagram separately), X, Google (and YouTube separately), TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube, and Microsoft are the recipients of a letter Schiff signed along with seven fellow members of the House of Representatives (four of them, like Schiff, California Democrats).

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

Keep reading

Weaponizing Peer Review

In their book, Merchants of Doubt, Naomi Oreskes and Eric Conway argue that scientists “know bad science when they see it”:

“It’s science that is obviously fraudulent — when data have been invented, fudged, or manipulated. Bad science is where data is have been cherry-picked— when some data have been deliberately left out—or it’s impossible for the reader to understand the steps that were taken to produce or analyze the data. It is a set of claims that can’t be tested, claims that are based on samples that are too small, and claims that don’t follow from the evidence provided. And science is bad—or at least weak—when proponents of a position jump to conclusions on insufficient or inconsistent data.”

Few would disagree with the Oreskes and Conway criteria of “bad science,” but how do we use the criteria to distinguish bad science from good science? Oreskes and Conway have an answer (emphasis in original):

“But while these scientific criteria may be clear in principle, knowing when they apply in practice is a judgment call. For this scientists rely on peer review. Peer review is a topic that is impossible to make sexy, but it’s crucial to understand, because it is what makes science science—and not just a form of opinion.”

Oreskes and Conway characterize “Potemkin village science” as the efforts of “merchants of doubt” to make their bad-science arguments look science-like using data and graphs — to fool the uninformed and contest the good science in the peer-reviewed literature. The good guys publish in peer reviewed publications, while the bad guys do not.

The idealization of peer review as the arbiter of good science is problematic for many reasons, but one is that it downplays the possibility that bad science can appear in the peer reviewed literature and good science outside of those outlets.

Keep reading

Minnesota ‘Acting as a Ministry of Truth’ With Anti-Deep Fake Law, Says Lawsuit

A new lawsuit takes aim at a Minnesota law banning the “use of deep fake technology to influence an election.” The measure—enacted in 2023 and amended this year—makes it a crime to share AI-generated content if a person “knows or acts with reckless disregard about whether the item being disseminated is a deep fake” and the sharing is done without the depicted individual’s consent, intended to “injure a candidate or influence the result of an election,” and either within 90 days before a political party nominating convention or after the start of the absentee voting period prior to a presidential nomination primary, any state or local primary, or a general election.

Christopher Kohls, a content creator who goes by Mr. Reagan, and by Minnesota state Rep. Mary Franson (R–District 12B) argue that the law is an “impermissible and unreasonable restriction of protected speech.”

Violating Minnesota’s deep fake law is punishable by up to 90 days imprisonment and/or a fine of up to $1,000, with penalties increasing if the offender has a prior conviction within the past five years for the same thing or the deep fake is determined to have been shared with an “intent to cause violence or bodily harm.” The law also allows for the Minnesota attorney general, county or city attorneys, individuals depicted in the deep fake, or any candidate “who is injured or likely to be injured by dissemination” to sue for injunctive relief “against any person who is reasonably believed to be about to violate or who is in the course of violating” the law.

If a candidate for office is found guilty of violating this law, they must forfeit the nomination or office and are henceforth disqualified “from being appointed to that office or any other office for which the legislature may establish qualifications.”

There are obviously a host of constitutional problems with this measure, which defines “deep fake” very broadly: “any video recording, motion-picture film, sound recording, electronic image, or photograph, or any technological representation of speech or conduct substantially derivative thereof” that is realistic enough for a reasonable person to believe it depicts speech or conduct that did not occur and developed though “technical means” rather than “the ability of another individual to physically or verbally impersonate such individual.”

Keep reading

Judge blocks California deepfakes law that sparked Musk-Newsom row

A federal judge on Wednesday blocked a California measure restricting the use of digitally altered political “deepfakes” just two weeks after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the bill into law.

The ruling is a blow to a push by the state’s leading Democrats to rein in misleading content on social media ahead of Election Day.

Chris Kohls, known as “Mr Reagan” on X, sued to prevent the state from enforcing the law after posting an AI-generated video of a Harris campaign ad on the social media site. He claimed the video was protected by the First Amendment because it was a parody.

The judge agreed.

“Most of [the law] acts as a hammer instead of a scalpel,” Senior U.S. District Judge John A. Mendez wrote, calling it “a blunt tool hinders humorous expression and unconstitutionally stifles the free and unfettered exchange of ideas.” He carved out an exception for a “not unduly burdensome” portion of the law that requires verbal disclosure of digitally altered content in audio-only recordings.

Theodore Frank, an attorney for Kohls, said in a statement they were “gratified that the district court agreed with our analysis.”

Keep reading

Facebook Gave CDC ‘Backdoor’ Access to Help Remove Millions of Social Media Posts

Facebook provided the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) “backdoor” access to its platform so the CDC could submit requests to remove COVID-19 “misinformation,” according to an internal Facebook document made public for the first time as part of an ongoing legal case.

America First Legal filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in 2021, after then-White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki revealed the Biden administration was flagging purported “disinformation” on social media platforms, including content posted by members of the so-called “Disinformation Dozen.”

When the Biden administration didn’t comply with the FOIA request, America First Legal sued, leading to the release of the documents as part of the discovery process.

According to Reclaim the Net, in 2021, Facebook developed a “Content Request System” (see pages 54-72) — also called a “Government Reporting System” — accessible to CDC staff. The documents show Facebook “was operating as the de facto enforcement arm of the US government’s thought control initiative.”

The Facebook-CDC partnership helped Facebook remove millions of posts, the documents show.

Gene Hamilton, executive director of America First Legal, told The Defender, “These documents show precisely how one of the social media platforms facilitated the federal government’s engagement in unconstitutional censorship activities.”

“The federal government cannot violate the First Amendment by outsourcing censorship to the private sector, yet these documents clearly show that Facebook and the Biden-Harris administration collaborated and colluded on removing speech that did not comport with the federal government’s preferences,” Hamilton said.

Tim Hinchliffe, editor of The Sociable, told The Defender that following the release of the “Twitter Files,” it should not come as a surprise “that the government has been actively trying to censor citizens through back doors and loopholes.”

“This censorship effort is yet another example of a public-private collaboration that fuses corporation and state,” Hinchliffe said. “Where the government can’t legally censor, it has the private sector to do its bidding. The question here is how much coercion was needed for Facebook to provide the backdoor?”

Keep reading

Censorship and Transparency Issues in “Anti-Terror” Tech Alliance

Big Tech’s Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT) alliance, often accused of censorship of legal content, continues to face allegations about an ongoing lack of transparency regarding its operations.

Founded two years ago by Meta, Microsoft, then Twitter, and YouTube (Google), it now has 25 members, and the stated goal is to flag and remove violent content from the internet.

The latest development regarding to controversial group – other than the ongoing transparency issues – is X deciding to leave the GIFCT board.

Two major problems have emerged around GIFCT’s activities and influence on the web: transparency, including around funding, and having a system in place that makes sure legal, non-violent content – such as that actually opposing terrorism, satire, media reports, etc – doesn’t get caught in the GIFTC net as well, resulting in censorship.

But, not one of the 25 members publicly shares how much content is removed (due to hash matches). Yet some idea of the size of the operation can be gleaned from YouTube’s contribution to the GIFCT database last year alone: 45,000 hashes.

There is also no information available about the number of appeals users lodge against content removal resulting from this process. It’s also unknown how many hashes are added by the companies themselves, and how many come from the government or researchers.

And apparently, GIFCT itself isn’t sure how many companies automate hash-sharing or flagging and removing content based on matches, and how many employ humans to do it.

The obscurity in which GIFCT labors is quite extraordinary, even by Big Tech standards: it is not known how many companies use the said database, and there is no independent auditing or internal review of the alliances’s work. In 2021, the BSR consultancy was hired to produce “a human rights impact assessment.”

47 changes were recommended, but the GIFCT board has not yet implemented any. And while at it – not even the founding four have always accepted suggestions coming from an independent advisory committee within GIFCT.

Keep reading

A Florida Judge Blocked a Newspaper from Publishing Video of a Jail Death

A Florida newspaper reports that video of a mentally ill man’s violent death in a county jail contradicts the sheriff office’s narrative of what happened. But the public may never get to see what really happened.

Florida Circuit Judge James R. Baxley ruled last month that the Ocala Gazette could view, but not publish, jailhouse footage of the 2022 death of Scott Whitley, a mentally ill man who died in the Marion County Jail after deputies pepper-sprayed, dogpiled, and tased him. Publishing the footage, Baxley ruled, would raise safety concerns.

The Gazette reported on September 25, after finally being able to view the footage, that Whitley “exhibited no physical violence toward Marion County Jail detention deputies before he was rushed to the floor, restrained and hit with a Taser 27 times over 12 minutes.” Furthermore, “Contrary to initial reports from the sheriff’s office that claimed Whitley refused to comply with guards’ orders, the footage shows the inmate sitting as ordered and, when he sees the guards rush towards him, he raises his hands in defense and pleads ‘no’ and ‘wait’—to no avail.”

The order is the latest development in a two-years-and-running transparency fight over records related to Whitley’s death.

Whitley, 46, was booked into the Marion County Jail on November 16, 2022, on charges of resisting an officer with violence and violating a protective order filed by his elderly parents to remove him from their home because of his deteriorating mental health. He had been diagnosed with schizophrenia and was placed on suicide watch in the jail. According to the Marion County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO), he was combative during his arrest and continued to be uncooperative and aggressive at the jail.

On November 25, Whitley refused to put his hands through his cell to be handcuffed during a routine cell inspection. Guards sprayed him with pepper foam, and after a few minutes they ordered Whitley to sit on the toilet. When he did, deputies rushed his cell and forced him to the ground.

Keep reading

The Babylon Bee Strikes Back: Lawsuit Takes on California’s Anti-Satire Laws

In a world where politicians crave safe spaces from jokes, California’s latest move to suppress satire might just take the cake. California has decided that it’s time to put an end to all that pesky “political humor.” Yes, the state that brought us Hollywood is now terrified of a few biting punchlines, and naturally, satire site The Babylon Bee and outspoken attorney Kelly Chang Rickert are not having it.

The champion of online irreverence has just slapped the State of California with a lawsuit that reads less like legalese and more like a desperate plea for common sense. They’re arguing, quite reasonably, that California’s new laws—AB 2839 and AB 2655—are a massive overreach, a heavy-handed attempt to quash their First Amendment rights and kill the punchline before it even has a chance to land.

We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.

Keep reading

Big Tech-Government Collusion: Biden-Haris Admin, Meta, Google, and Others Launch AI Partnership to Combat “Disinformation” and “Hate Speech”

The current US White House seems to be exploring every possibility that might secure another avenue for what opponents (and quite a few lawmakers) refer to as “collusion” with (Big) Tech.

A new scheme has just been announced, that revolves around the “AI” and “disinformation” buzzwords, and includes the US State Department, Meta, Anthropic, Google, IBM, Microsoft, Nvidia, and OpenAI.

Looks like quite an “ensemble cast” – or “usual suspects” – right there.

It’s called, Partnership for Global Inclusivity on AI, and it was announced by Secretary of State Anthony Blinken along with a decision to bankroll programs “identifying disinformation using AI” with $3 million.

We obtained a copy of the report for you here.

Keep reading

EXPLOSIVE CENSORSHIP DOCUMENTS – America First Legal Releases Complete Internal Facebook Onboarding Documents Used to Train CDC Employees on How to Censor the American Public

Today, America First Legal released additional documents from its litigation against the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), exposing the complete onboarding documents Facebook used to train CDC employees on their government censorship portal to block free speech on “Covid & Vaccine Misinformation.” 

Many Americans remember the unprecedented level of censorship by the Biden-Harris Administration in 2021. Unelected public health officials constantly revised their guidance, leading to repeating something that was “true” a week ago could suddenly get an account suspended. The Biden-Harris Administration’s clumsy and heavy-handed attempts to keep up with the rapidly evolving information environment entailed by a global pandemic gave all Americans a stark reminder of why the First Amendment was listed first.

These documents reveal how Facebook, on the heels of extreme pressure from the Biden-Harris White House (including from Rob Flaherty, a current senior Harris Campaign staffer) to remove specific posts, responded:

  • Facebook created a new “end-to-end workflow” so that government officials could submit links for removal from Facebook;
  • Facebook only gave access to the portal to approved government and law enforcement personnel;
  • The new portal dramatically increased the efficiency of the censorship machine by allowing up to twenty links at a time to be referred for censoring;
  • By moving from email chains to a Facebook-hosted portal, the new system also made it harder for organizations like AFL to provide oversight to individual censorship requests;
  • Each censorship request automatically generated a ticket number so that the government could track if Facebook complied with its censorship demands;  
  • The documents further show how Facebook explained precisely what content it would remove and what it needed from the CDC in order to censor certain narratives within the bounds of its “community standards.” 

This release comes on the heels of recently released documents from that lawsuit, which exposed the United Kingdom’s influence on the Biden-Harris Administration’s censorship policy, and Zuckerberg’s admission that Facebook only engaged in censorship after extreme pressure from the Biden-Harris White House. 

The Intercept previously released excerpts from this slide deck, but AFL is now publishing the entire deck for the first time. 

Keep reading