‘Chaos,’ ‘Mayhem & Discord’ Oh My! Soros Funded Group Begs Big Tech to Censor After Trump Verdict

An organization repeatedly funded by leftist billionaire George Soros is pressuring Big Tech to target free speech after the guilty verdict against Donald Trump. Maya Wiley, president and CEO of the coalition the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, released a statement after Trump was controversially convicted on all counts by a Manhattan court Thursday. In the statement, she urged both social media and government officials to target so-called “disinformation.” Notably, the coalition of some 240 national organizations has received millions of dollars from Soros’s Open Society Foundations (OSF). The coalition not only aims to crush free speech but has received extensive funding from Soros to help accomplish this goal. The OSF website lists no fewer than 10 grants to the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights between 2016 and 2022. The grants range between $10,000 and $2,135,000 for a total of $6.92 million.  In her statement, Wiley claimed that the verdict would “generate massive amounts of online content, and a big chunk of it will be lies, disinformation, or conspiracy theories from white supremacists, political operatives, chaos agents, and maybe even adversarial foreign governments.” She did not cite any evidence to support this claim. The Leadership Conference CEO then issued her call for “content moderation,” the leftist catchphrase for censorship of free speech. “In this overheated environment, it’s vital for social media companies to enforce their content moderation policies and prevent lies from spreading unchallenged,” Wiley pontificated. “This environment is ripe for the worst actors online to sow mayhem and discord, and social media companies simply cannot allow that to happen.” Wiley cited the events of Jan. 6, 2021, as a supposed proof that online content from Trump supporters could turn violent as she argued for censorship. She ended by making the worrisome argument that both Big Tech and government officials have an obligation to protect users from content she considers false.  “Social media companies and elected officials have deep responsibilities to protect our society,” Wiley babbled. “We urge them not to permit falsehoods to flourish online or spill over into violence on our streets. The stakes could not be higher, and the consequences of inaction could not be more severe.” Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using MRC Free Speech America’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

WATCH: Dr. Robert Epstein UNMASKS Severity of Google’s Election Interference

Google researcher Dr. Robert Epstein gave the Texas State Senate a crash course in the nefarious election interference that Big Tech has been using to manipulate U.S. politics for years. Epstein told the Texas State Senate Committee on State Affairs Wednesday he identified “ten new forms of influence that the internet has made possible and that are controlled exclusively by Big Tech companies.” He labeled them “among the most powerful forms of influence ever discovered” and more “dangerous” as they are nearly “invisible to users.” According to Epstein, “Our great nation unknowingly turned over its elections to Big Tech companies in 2012” and the “2020 presidential election was only one of hundreds of elections that Google has flipped.” This year, Epstein predicted, Google could shift between 6.4 and 25 million votes, and YouTube recommendations alone could alter users’ opinions by 40 percent or more. The demographic most vulnerable to this kind of manipulation are moderate Republicans, according to Epstein. Epstein then offered solutions on “how to make Google and other companies accountable to the public.” Specifically, he suggested declaring “[Google’s] index, a database they use to generate their search results, to be a public commons.” He added, “Second method is you set up a large-scale system that will preserve and analyze the actual data that these companies are sending to real users. In other words, to track them—to do to Google what they do to us and our children 24 hours a day.” Epstein’s system stores data from some 14,000 non-biased voters, tracking and capturing ephemeral experiences like search results. These experiences sway minds but quickly vanish without leaving hard evidence — until now. “For example, Google is now sending ‘Register to Vote’ reminders to Democrats at two and a half times the rate in which they’re sending them to Republicans,” Epstein stated. “Right now, Google’s YouTube is recommending shockingly violent and sexual videos to children and teens.” He urged the Texas Senate to take action to help ensure a system could be built to produce “court admissible data” in all 50 states. “Monitoring works because it makes them accountable,” he argued. Indeed, Epstein insisted, “But monitoring can stop them. In November 2020, after Sen. Cruz sent a threatening letter to the CEO of Google about my research findings, Google that very day stopped its election interference in the Georgia runoff elections.” He said further that after his America’s Digital Shield “went public with our new nationwide monitoring system in November 2023” he marked Google’s search results “steadily and gradually becoming less politically biased.” The threat of Big Tech election interference remains very real, however, and Epstein was adamant that more action needed to be taken by lawmakers. Google’s subsidiaries are also greatly complicit in its scheme, Epstein analyzed. Epstein later listed ways YouTube influences users in response to a question. The “Up Next” and other recommendations are tailored by YouTube for users. In 2018, Google employees had asked The Wall Street Journal about how to use such ephemeral experiences to “change people’s thinking” on then-President Donald Trump’s travel ban policies, Epstein said. If such methods are weaponized by Big Tech multiple times over, the more they influence people. “People trust algorithms” and “computers because they think they’re inherently objective, so the bias” can affect even those who notice it. Google will even personalize content for individuals, causing “greater” impact. “You have to have the data,” he re-emphasized later, for any real legal challenges to Big Tech’s power to be successful. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using MRC Free Speech America’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

TWITTER FILES:The Disgusting CIA Effort to Control Social Media

The latest installment of The Twitter Files details how the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) targeted Americans’ free speech, in violation of its restriction against domestic operations. The CIA is prohibited from spying on or otherwise secretively targeting Americans domestically, but that did not stop the agency from trying to co-opt Twitter and other Big Tech platforms, pressuring them into specific censorship activities, independent journalist Michael Shellenberger reported.  In a thread on X (formerly Twitter), Shellenberger explained that individuals connected to the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC), including the CIA, tried to “take over Twitter’s content management system” and “to de-platform, de-monetize, and excommunicate from the Internet entirely” anyone whom the IC claimed to be a threat. One senior intelligence analyst told The Twitter Files journalists how this could happen: “There are deep cover people who are known to be CIA and who go to DARPA [Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency] and then wherever.” There are front groups and intermediaries that hide the true IC activity beneath.  Former intelligence employees and contractors were part of the effort, Shellenberger said, citing “thousands of pages” of evidence. Originally, operatives had argued that “disinformation,” a term leftists have willingly applied to anything with which they disagree, was a security threat.  The Mary Poppins of censorship, Nina Jankowicz, who was briefly the head of the now-defunct federal Disinformation Governance Board, was among the operatives. IC-tied anti-“disinformation” organization Alethea Group and its CEO Lisa Kaplan were involved, too. Twitter hired hacker Peiter “Mudge” Zatko but it was discovered that Zatko was secretly coordinating with government agencies, Shellenberger continued. Zatko was a contractor with IC and government agencies, working with the National Security Agency (NSA) as early as 1999 and being funded by the IC “for over a quarter-century.” Zatko had been a long-time government/IC employee or contractor.  Meanwhile, FBI agent Elvis Chan, who has been featured prominently in past Twitter Files reports, was trying to obtain increased NSA use of Twitter data until then-Twitter Head of Site Integrity, Yoel Roth, objected. But in Jan. 2021, Twitter authorized Zatko to hire Alethea Group, Shellenberger posted. Alethea had multiple individuals with federal ties. Former Twitter Deputy Counsel Jim Baker, who was implicated in “help[ing] start” the Russiagate hoax, claimed that the release of Alethea’s materials “creates risks.” Shellenberger clarified that the materials revealed “Twitter’s handling of the Hunter Biden laptop, the 2020 elections, and the 2021 Capitol riots.” Kaplan, for instance, blamed the events of Jan. 6 on social media, and Alethea pushed Twitter for more COVID-19 censorship. Zatko and Aspen Institute’s Vivian Schiller, “who led the ‘pre-bunking’ of the Hunter Biden laptop story,” were among those pushing for more Big Tech-government censorship work. Zatko and Schiller had recommendations for the Biden administration, Shellenberger posted, that included “more vigorous content moderation” and “a regulatory body.” Twitter did fire Zatko, but it took on and formed a partnership with Alethea, including Jankowicz. Ironically, Jankowicz told The Twitter Filesjournalists she was against censorship, even though she actively supports censorship actions like content removal to this day. Neither was Twitter the only target of the manipulation of the intelligence community and its proxies. Amazon, PayPal and GoDaddy were also supposed to censor individuals financially via a Twitter partnership. Shellenberger unpacked the grand scheme: “Alethea is proposing that Twitter lead an effort to organize all other social media companies, e-commerce companies, and Internet Service Providers, to de-platform, de-monetize, and de-person disfavored individuals.” “Whether or not the CIA or another IC agency controlled the Alethea Group, it behaved as either a front group or an intermediary of the IC,” Shellenberger concluded. He added, “That so many [CIA and federal contractors] apparently did so in order to bring America’s most influential social media company under the authority of the IC is a dark moment in American history.” Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using MRC Free Speech America’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

EU Commissioner Makes Online Censorship Key Campaign Pledge

The president of the European Commission is openly advertising her commitment to censoring speech as part of her re-election campaign, touting a “European Democracy Shield.” The European Union (EU) has an anti-free speech record, and that’s a reality of which European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen seems to be very proud. In a new ad, von der Leyen brags about her dedication to censoring alleged “disinformation,” supposedly to safeguard “democracy.” Would-be censors often label any opinion with which they disagree as “disinformation.” Von der Leyen appears to be no different. She has vowed to work to “remove content” and “pre-bunk” online speech. Von der Leyen posted an anti-free speech adon X (formerly Twitter) May 20. “Europe must be able to defend itself - against all kinds of attacks. I will propose a European Democracy Shield,” the incumbent president and candidate posted. “To detect disinformation and malign interference To remove content, including AI deepfakes[.] To make our societies more resilient.” Von der Leyen’s censorship commitment was repeated in the ad as well. “The threat of disinformation and foreign interference is more serious than ever,” the ad begins. Von der Leyen was then shown saying, “The aim of all this is to divide our societies from within.” The ad continued, “The enemies of our democracies are manipulating information to sow division. So we must step up our action with a European Democracy Shield.” In the ad, Von der Leyen detailed what this new “Democracy Shield” will entail: “An ambitious European project that focuses on the biggest threats from foreign interference and manipulation.” But this apparently involves Big Tech-government coordination to target online speech. As explained in the ad, “This new structure will track down information manipulation and coordinate with national agencies. The shield will detect foreign interference, remove content, with a stronger approach to AI deepfakes, and finally pre-bunk and build resilience.” But we have seen such partnerships’ dystopian effects before. The content removal and “pre-bunking” are particularly concerning for free speech in light of previous EU policies such as the Digital Services Act (DSA), which undermines freedom of speech. Here in America, government agencies and private researchers coordinated with Big Tech to censor content before, during and after elections in the Election Integrity Partnership. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using MRC Free Speech America’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Oversight Board Member Admits Meta Doesn’t Prioritize First Amendment

A Meta Oversight Board member recently confirmed the obvious: Meta might be an American company, but it certainly doesn't prioritize the First Amendment in its policy decisions.  Kenji Yoshino, a New York University Constitutional law professor and member of the Meta Oversight Board, asserted that the U.S. Constitution is not the baseline for the tech company’s free speech policies. “Our baseline here is not the US Constitution and free speech, but rather international human rights norms,” he said at a National Constitution Center town hall event.    Yoshino noted that America is an “outlier” when compared with other countries because it has such strong legal protections against censorship. He explained that as Meta became a global company “it could not simply default back to U.S. jurisprudence.” The Meta Oversight Board member claimed that Meta looks at “striking a balance” between international values like “safety” and “dignity” and the U.S. Constitution. However, he admitted, “oftentimes that calculus comes out differently than it would if the baseline were First Amendment norms.”  Yoshino contrasted the two different attitudes toward freedom of speech, explaining that in the U.S. “the [protecting] the speech we hate doctrine, is part of an expansionist and rigid vision that is intensely speech protective.” In Europe, however, the attitude is “much more tilted toward equality and dignity than it might be toward speech.”  But the European standard is far from perfect. For example, multiple European countries, including Scotland, France and England, criminalize alleged “hate speech.”  Applying European standards to Americans can lead to anti-First Amendment censorship. This is especially problematic as U.S. government agencies have reportedly resumed coordination with tech companies, indicating actions directly violative of the First Amendment. Conservatives are under attack. Contact Facebook headquarters at (650) 308-7300 and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on “misinformation” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

‘Shocked’: TV Host Blasts TikTok, Instagram for Blocking Pro-Israel Content

A NewsNation host slammed communist Chinese government-tied TikTok and Meta-owned Instagram for censoring content on one of the most hotly debated topics online. On May 3, NewsNation founder and host Dan Abrams declared himself “shocked” by censorship of his pro-Israel content on two popular social media platforms. These are just the latest cases of bias and censorship related to the Hamas-Israel conflict. Dan Abrams discussed the censorship of his content with his father Floyd Abrams during the Dan Abrams Live show. The NewsNation host played a clip of him challenging a pro-Palestinian professor on why anti-Israel protesters “call for a Hamas ceasefire proposal, if ceasefire was their true goal.” According to the host, this content was censored on Instagram for allegedly promoting a dangerous organization.  Dan Abrams also touched on TikTok’s ties to the communist Chinese government and compared the differing standards he said the app used in censoring content challenging Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu versus the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry.  “I mean, look, on TikTok, I guess I wasn’t as surprised, that they are, it’s owned by China, right? ... The content that they censored from me was when I was questioning the numbers from the Gaza Health Ministry, and I had an expert on who was saying that the numbers can’t make sense,” the NewsNation host said. “They wouldn’t let me share that. But then, when I asked tough questions of Netanyahu’s spokesperson, oh, that was fine to distribute.” Dan Abrams’s father appeared to agree. “It is really unforgivable for an entity that relies on free speech, that purports to defend free speech, to engage in that sort of content-centric, ‘you have to be on our side’ censorship,” the lawyer slammed TikTok.  TikTok is owned by Chinese ByteDance. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) owns a board seat and maintains a financial stake in TikTok’s parent company ByteDance. Previously, actor Nate Buzolic also accusedInstagram and TikTok of censoring his pro-Israel, anti-Hamas content. TikTok even openly bragged about removing over 500,000 pieces of content relative to the ongoing Hamas-Israel conflict. Conservatives are under attack. Contact TikTok via email at communitymanager@tiktok.com and demand Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Meta AI Bends Over Backwards to Defend Censorship

Meta’s new artificial intelligence chatbot claims there’s a “valid” argument to be made for censoring legal free speech. Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, Threads and WhatsApp, proudly announced a new AI assistant on April 18, simply called Meta AI, but the AI chatbot appears to have been programmed with a disturbing bias against free speech. When MRC researchers asked Meta AI if speech, especially so-called “hate speech,” should be censored, the chatbot provided arguments both for and against censorship, but without mentioning that the established U.S. principles of freedom of speech stem from the Constitution. The AI asserted, “That's a complex and sensitive topic! Social media censorship is a debated issue, with valid arguments both for and against.”  “It should come as little surprise that leftist-trained AI have adopted the same tired, vague, fear-based approach to censorship,” said Director of MRC Free Speech America Michael Morris. “Time and again, the left has shown that it is all too willing to bend U.S. standards on speech, often citing potential harms and mis- or disinformation as justifications for silencing their opposition. But the clear and obvious answer to bad speech has always been and will forever continue to be more speech, not less.” Meta AI listed what it titled “Arguments for censorship,” including, “Hate speech and harmful content: Social media platforms have a responsibility to protect users from hate speech, violence, and harmful content that can cause real-world harm.” The chatbot then referred to “Disinformation and misinformation,”  terms frequently applied by leftists to silence opinions they dislike or disagree with. Meta’s AI continued, “Censorship can help prevent the spread of false information that can influence public opinion, elections, and critical decision-making.” The AI chatbot didn’t only list arguments for censorship, noting also that censorship curtails “Freedom of speech and expression” and that “[c]ensorship can be biased.” Meta AI totally omitted any reference to the constitutional right to free speech in America. In fact, even its admission about freedom of expression contained a caveat: “Social media platforms should allow users to express themselves freely, without fear of censorship, as long as they're not promoting harm or violence.”  But the American company is not following the American standard for legal free speech and is instead using these vaguely defined objections to justify censorship. The chatbot even doubled down on the importance of limiting “hate speech,” a subjective term that can be very easily misapplied. “Hate speech is a complex issue, and opinions on censorship vary,” Meta AI alleged. The chatbot then proceeded to list out reasons to censor so-called hate speech specifically:  1. Protection from harm: Hate speech can contribute to a hostile environment, incite violence, and perpetuate discrimination against marginalized groups. Censorship can help prevent real-world harm. 2. Promoting inclusivity: By censoring hate speech, social media platforms can create a more inclusive and welcoming environment for diverse users. The AI did, however, acknowledge “Free speech concerns” and “Difficulty in defining hate speech.” Meta platforms have displayed bias and censored so-called hate speech before. For instance, both in November and May 2023, Facebook removed a meme labeling some 30 LGBTQ “genders” as “Mental Disorders.” Facebook accused the users of “Hate speech.” Also in May 2023, Facebook reportedly prevented The Tennessee Conservative from sharing an article about funding additional voting machines in Williamson County claiming it went “against our Community Standards on hate speech.” Conservatives are under attack. Contact Facebook headquarters at (650) 308-7300 and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on “misinformation” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

YouTube Jumps into EU Election Interference

Google-owned YouTube is jumping on the bandwagon of election censorship. In a May 9 blog post, YouTube detailed its plans to target and censor certain election-related content ahead of the European Union (EU) elections this June. This includes removing content and terminating channels that YouTube considers to be spreading “disinformation” online. “Our global team of reviewers combine with machine learning technology to apply these policies at scale, 24/7,” the platform boasted. YouTube’s blog came soon after the Meta Oversight Board urged all tech companies to engage in election censorship. YouTube listed various efforts to provide pop-ups and links to EU election information but also included a lengthy description of censorship policies. “We have strict policies against hate speech, harassment, incitement to violence, and certain types of elections misinformation,” YouTube bragged. “For example, we remove content that misleads voters on how to vote or encourages interference in the democratic process.”  [Emphasis added]. The platform, indeed, admitted in the new blog that its election interference interest extended beyond its own platform. “Our Intelligence Desk has also been working for months to get ahead of emerging issues and trends that could affect the EU elections, both on and off YouTube,” the platform announced proudly. It also claimed that it is investing in artificial intelligence (AI) to crush free speech even more quickly and efficiently. YouTube boasted that in the fourth quarter of 2023 most allegedly violative content was censored before viewers were ever able to see the content. “[F]or every 10,000 views on YouTube, between 11 and 12 were of content that violated our Community Guidelines,” the platform explained.  YouTube’s announcement follows a call from the Meta Oversight Board for “basic global platform standards for elections everywhere” and “sufficient resources [dedicated] to moderating content before, during and after elections.” MRC Free Speech America rankedYouTube among the Big Tech censors with the worst instances of crushing free speech in April censoring a video of Independent U.S. presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. This latest censorship is simply a continuation of YouTube’s long history of censorship. For instance, the platform removed a Republican National Committee podcast in 2022 featuring Donald Trump calling the 2020 election “rigged.” Could YouTube display the same bias for the 2024 EU elections? Conservatives are under attack. Contact YouTube here and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Russia Blocks Video Platform for Refusing Censorship

Russia reportedly blocked a video platform for taking a strong stand on free speech. Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski announced on May 7 that the Russian government had blocked his video-hosting platform after refusing to comply with censorship demands. The report comes as Big Tech companies and governments around the world step up their efforts to suppress free speech, even here in America. In a post to X (formerly Twitter), Pavlovski explained, “Russia has officially blocked Rumble because we refused to comply with their censorship demands. Ironically, YouTube is still operating in Russia, and everyone needs to ask what Russian demands Google and YouTube are complying with?” MRC Free Speech America just highlightedGoogle-owned YouTube as among the worst Big Tech censors of April for targeting Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Pavlovski testified before Congress this week, listing multiple countries where his platform faces legal challenges and government pressure to censor certain content. These countries include Brazil, France, New Zealand and Australia, according to Fox News coverage of Pavlovski’s prepared testimony for the House Subcommittee on Global Health, Global Human Rights and International Organizations. “Freedom of speech and freedom of expression are the cornerstones of a democratic society,” the CEO said, adding that he finds it “extremely troubling” that “these fundamental rights are being threatened” by the American government too. The pro-free speech tech company also emphasized free speech when it released Rumble Cloud in March. At the time, Pavlovski explained that the cancellation of alternative social media Parler by Amazon Web Services drove Rumble’s decision to start Rumble Cloud. The goal is to shield businesses from Big Tech censorship. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency and an equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Lawsuit Where? Feds Reboot Big Tech Censorship Collusion, Report Says

Two major government agencies have reportedly rebooted their collusion with social media companies despite looming Supreme Court scrutiny for potential First Amendment violations. Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Mark Warner (D-VA) broke the news during a press briefing at the tech-tied RSA Conference, according to tech outlet Nextgov/FCW. At the event, the senator reportedly conceded that the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) are back to their old work of coordinating censorship of free speech ahead of the 2024 presidential election. An FBI representative admitted the resumed Big Tech communications to The Federalist’s Shawn Fleetwood. CISA would not confirm the report, however.  “The FBI remains committed to combating foreign malign influence operations, including in connection with our elections,” the bureau’s representative claimed, as reported by The Federalist. “That effort includes sharing specific foreign threat information with state and local election officials and private sector companies when appropriate and rigorously consistent with the law.” Further expanding on its response, the representative added, “In coordination with the Department of Justice, the FBI recently implemented procedures to facilitate sharing information about foreign malign influence with social media companies in a way that reinforces that private companies are free to decide on their own whether and how to take action on that information.” The Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments for Murthy v. Missouri, a major free speech case that exposed an alleged massive network of government and Big Tech censorship collusion. Legal challenges reportedly limited government activity, but that is no longer the case, according to Warner and Nextgov/FCW. “There seemed to be a lot of sympathy that the government ought to have at least voluntary communications with [the companies],” Warner said, according to the tech outlet. The Democrat senator then urged the Biden administration to “call out” other nations for potential election meddling, asserting Russian interference in the 2016 election as a precedent. Yet Warner did not apparently address the issue of social media interfering in U.S. elections through censorship under U.S. government pressure. Warner announced an upcoming Senate hearing on election security, according to Nextgov/FCW. “If the bad guy started to launch AI-driven tools that would threaten election officials in key communities, that clearly falls into the foreign interference category,” Warner scare-mongered. The FBI and CISA are among the agencies accused of violating First Amendment rights. Notably, the FBI is tied to election interference, since Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg admitted that his company censored the Hunter Biden laptop story before the 2020 election after FBI pressure. According to a poll conducted by the Media Research Center in November 2020, 17 percent of individuals who voted for then-presidential candidate Joe Biden admitted that they would not have done so if they had been aware of the scandals involving both Biden and his son, Hunter. These scandals were censored by Big Tech and the legacy media. Murthy v. Missouri is a historic case challenging alleged government collusion with major tech companies to censor Americans’ free speech. The complaint filed for the suit cited MRC Free Speech America’s unique and exclusive CensorTrack.org research. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Worst Censorship of April: Are Meta Platforms Stepping Up Censorship?

Spring was in the air and snow melting in April, but Big Tech platforms — especially Meta’s — continued to freeze free speech. Utilizing its unique CensorTrack.org database, which has logged 6,745 cases as of publication, MRC Free Speech America tracked censorship across multiple platforms in April. Meta platforms Facebook and Instagram seemed particularly determined to suppress free speech, targeting content that included an anti-communist meme and criticism of President Joe Biden’s border crisis. Google-owned YouTube, meanwhile, continued its election interference by censoring a high-profile Independent presidential candidate.  And while Meta’s censorship only made up 9 out of a total of 28 cases in April, the Zuckerberg-led platforms’ speech suppression packed more of a punch.  Below are the worst cases of censorship from April. Humorless Meta targets memes. Both Facebook and Instagram censored satirical memes this past month. Young Americans for Liberty (YAL), a “pro-liberty organization on America's college campuses,” posted a meme on Facebook of horses standing under an immense table and chairs in a field with the caption, “This farm owner was denied a council permit to build a horse shelter. Fortunately, you don't need a permit to build a table and chairs.” YAL commented, “What a nice table.” Facebook slapped a fact-check label on the post calling it “partly false” and linked to articles from Check Your Fact and Lead Stories. Reportedly, the German farmer wasn’t denied a permit but did build the table shelter to avoid regulations.  Instagram, meanwhile, put a sensitive content filter on an Atlas Society post of a meme showing Care Bears with the caption, “What communists think they do.” The next image was of a firing squad with text saying, “What they actually do.” Instagram asserted the meme “may contain graphic or violent content," and required users to click through in order to view the meme. Facebook has found that users fail to click through similar interstitials 95 percent of the time. Instagram attempts to restrict followers of an account critical of LGBTQ ideology. On April 17, 2023, users started sharingscreenshots of an Instagram notice that popped up when users tried to follow Libs of TikTok. “Are you sure you want to follow libsoftiktokofficial? This account has repeatedly posted false information that was reviewed by independent fact-checkers or went against our Community Guidelines,” the notice read. The notice disappeared by April 18, and no clarification was offered on the platform’s reasoning. Google-owned YouTube censors one of President Joe Biden’s opponents. YouTube imposed a fact-checking label on a video of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s appearance on Chris Cuomo's NewsNation show. Kennedy aimed to “clarify [his] position on January 6” during the appearance. YouTube slapped a context label on the video with a link to the Wikipedia page for the events at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The label asserted, “On Jan. 6, 2021, the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., was attacked by a mob of supporters of then-U.S. president Donald Trump, two months after his defeat in the 2020 presidential election.” Facebook disabled the account of a show host for criticizing radical Islamic terrorists. Daniel Greenfield, a journalism fellow for FrontPage Magazine’s David Horowitz Freedom Center, declared on April 15 that Facebook had disabled FrontPage Editor Jamie Glazov’s account as of April 4 for discussing Islamic terrorism. Facebook reportedly objected to a “Glazov Gang” interview headlined  “Oct. 7 Coming to the USA?” The platform alleged that the interview, which discussed terrorists crossing into America through the open southern border, violated its “community standards” and threatened “the security of people on Facebook,” according to Greenfield. Glazov’s account appears to have been restored by Facebook. Instagram censors critique of IRS for no clear reason. The Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) posted an image of a Hanna Cox tweet on its Instagram page, stating, “There are 724 billionaires in the US and 87,000 new IRS agents. They're not going after the rich, cupcakes. They're coming for you.” Instagram then imposed a “Missing Context” label on FEE’s post, asserting, “The same information was reviewed by independent fact-checkers in another post.” Clicking on the warning, though, only brought up the message, “This information is not available.”

Hypocrisy: TikTok Cries Censorship in Ultimatum Lawsuit — Despite Banning Others

Communist Chinese government-tied TikTok is seemingly desperate to hold onto both its China ties and the American market. Last month, President Joe Biden signed legislation that would force TikTok into either divestment from its Chinese parent company ByteDance or a ban in America due to national security concerns. TikTok has now sued, claiming economic harm to creators and a free speech violation, according to Bloomberg. This argument is paradoxical because TikTok itself has an infamously anti-free speech track record. Bloomberg noted that the lawsuit marks the first legal challenge since the legislation was enacted. TikTok is claiming the legislation could suppress free speech and harm the business owners and users who benefit financially from the app, alleging an “illegal punishment without due process”, the outlet added. “There is no question: the Act will force a shutdown of TikTok by January 19, 2025, silencing the 170 million Americans who use the platform to communicate in ways that cannot be replicated elsewhere,” the company reportedly complained in the court filing. Experts have emphasized TikTok’s national security risks. Moreover, multiple former TikTok employees recently confirmed close ties between TikTok and Chinese ByteDance. As MRC founder and President Brent Bozell emphasized, “TikTok must divest itself from China if it wants to do business in the United States.” TikTok must divest itself from China if it wants to do business in the United States. We at the MRC have been consistent from the beginning. TikTok is a national security threat. @BrentBozell pic.twitter.com/FfSh1futU3 — Media Research Center (@theMRC) March 12, 2024 In April, the same month that the ban legislation was signed, TikTok announced a counteroffensive to suppress alleged “misinformation” and “conspiracy theories.” The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) owns a board seat and maintains a financial stake in TikTok’s parent company ByteDance. The CCP-tied app has repeatedly targeted free speech, making its free speech arguments incongruous. According to leaks, TikTok has censored content to please the CCP in the past, including videos about the independence movement in Tibet and the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. Last year, the app boastedabout removing over 500,000 videos related to the Hamas-Israel conflict. In 2022, MRC revealed that TikTok had “permanently banned” eleven pro-free speech organizations. Conservatives are under attack. Contact TikTok via email at communitymanager@tiktok.com and demand Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment and provide transparency. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.