Censorship Industrial Complex
Freedom of speech tops list of concerns for Americans
From The Center Square
By
“Republicans trust Republicans to protect their speech, and Democrats trust Democrats. But the true test of commitment to free speech is whether politicians protect dissenting speech. No matter who’s in charge”
Freedom of speech is a critical issue for most Americans, over crime, immigration, and health care, a new poll says.
Despite bipartisan agreement on its importance, there is disagreement on who will safeguard our First Amendment rights – a question the outcome of the presidential election may soon answer.
A new poll from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, or FIRE, conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago finds a majority of Americans rate free speech as very important to their vote in 2024, second only to inflation.
When asked about a host of issues in context with the upcoming election, 1,022 Americans were most concerned with inflation – 68% said increasing costs were “very important,” with 91% calling it at least “somewhat important.”
Free speech followed, with 63% saying it was “very important” and 90% said it was at least “somewhat important.”
“Higher prices might be the top concern for Americans, but a very close second is the increasing cost of speaking your mind,” said FIRE Research Fellow Nathan Honeycutt. “The message is clear: Americans want their free speech rights respected.”
Although at least 90% of both major parties rate it “somewhat important,” 70% of Republicans are more likely to rate it “very important,” as opposed to 60% of Democrats.
The report says Democrats and Republicans both express very low confidence the opposing party will respect their free speech – and Independents don’t trust either party to do so.
It also states that Republicans were more likely to respond that they were somewhat concerned about their ability to speak less freely today than they were four years ago.
“Republicans trust Republicans to protect their speech, and Democrats trust Democrats,” said FIRE’s Chief Research Advisor Sean Stevens. “But the true test of commitment to free speech is whether politicians protect dissenting speech. No matter who’s in charge, FIRE will be there to keep them honest.”
The organization’s Senior Program Officer Marcus Maldonado told The Center Square that it was pleased to partner with the National Constitution Center and First Amendment Watch at NYU to bring the First Amendment Summit back to Philadelphia for the second year in a row.
“Featuring a keynote conversation about global free speech with Jason Rezaian of The Washington Post and panel discussions about free speech online and on campus, the National First Amendment Summit presented the public with a vigorous discussion of the state of free speech in America and around the globe,” he said.
Jonathan Turley, another panelist and author of The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage, said since the beginning of the republic, every generation believes they have some existential threat that allows them to silence their neighbors.
He added that technology and social media have created new free speech challenges, was critical of how Twitter and Facebook have restricted free speech and does not believe in trade-offs made to prevent “disinformation.”
Even though the technology is new, he said, “it takes a lot to get a free people to give up freedom. Since the beginning, fear and anger have caused rage rhetoric, which becomes an excuse for every government to crack down. And the question is whether each generation is willing to give up that part of their freedom.”
Turley asserted that “this is the most dangerous anti-free speech period in our history, because we’ve never seen an alliance with the government, media, academia, and corporations” like this one.”
Censorship Industrial Complex
Global media alliance colluded with foreign nations to crush free speech in America: House report
From LifeSiteNews
By Dan Frieth
The now-defunct ad coalition GARM shared insider data and urged boycotts of Twitter to punish non-compliance with its ‘harmful content’ standards, a US House Judiciary report shows.
A new report from the U.S. House Judiciary Committee has shed light on what it describes as an alarming collaboration between powerful corporations and foreign governments aimed at suppressing lawful American speech.
The investigation focuses on the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), an initiative founded in 2019 by the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA), which the committee accuses of acting as a censorship cartel.
According to the report, GARM, whose members control about 90 percent of global advertising spending, exploited its market dominance to pressure platforms like Twitter (now X) into compliance with its restrictive content policies.
A copy of the report can be found HERE.
The committee highlighted how GARM sought to “effectively reduce the availability and monetization” of content it deemed harmful, regardless of public demand for free expression.
Documents obtained by the committee reveal direct coordination between GARM and foreign regulators, including the European Commission and Australia’s eSafety commissioner.
In one exchange, a European bureaucrat encouraged advertisers to leverage their influence to “push Twitter to deliver on GARM asks.”
Similarly, Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant praised GARM’s “significant collective power in helping to hold the platforms to account” and sought updates to “take into account in our engagement and regulatory decisions.”
Robert Rakowitz, GARM’s co-founder and initiative lead, expressed a chilling goal in private correspondence, stating that silencing President Donald Trump was his “main thing” and likening the president’s speech to a “contagion” he aimed to contain “to protect infection overall.”
The report outlines how GARM distributed previously unavailable non-public information about Twitter’s adherence to its standards, fully aware this would prompt advertisers to boycott the platform if it failed to conform. According to the House report, Rakowitz admitted that this information sharing was designed to encourage members not to advertise on Twitter.
He went as far as to draft statements urging GARM members to halt advertising on the platform, telling colleagues he had gone “as close as possible” to saying Twitter “is unsafe, cease and desist.”
Despite the widespread impact of GARM’s actions, including what the committee describes as coerced “concessions” from platforms, internal polling circulated within GARM showed that “66 percent of American consumers valued free expression over protection from harmful content.”
Still, GARM pressed ahead with efforts to “eliminate all categories of harmful content in the fastest possible timing,” ignoring consumer preferences.
Even after GARM dissolved in 2024 amid legal challenges, similar efforts persisted.
A new coalition led by Dentsu and The 614 Group briefly attempted to revive GARM’s mission before disbanding under scrutiny. Gerry D’Angelo, a former GARM leader, reflected on the initiative’s overreach, stating, “Did we go too far in those first rounds of exclusionary restrictions? I would say yes.”
The Judiciary Committee warns that despite GARM’s downfall, the threat of collusion to stifle free expression remains.
It pledged to continue oversight to defend “the fundamental principles” of the Constitution and ensure that markets, not coordinated censorship efforts, shape the flow of information in the digital age.
Reprinted with permission from Reclaim The Net.
Censorship Industrial Complex
FBI urged to release withheld records on Hunter Biden laptop, other ‘Twitter Files’
From LifeSiteNews
By Dan Frieth
Judicial Watch initiated the lawsuit in April 2023, targeting the DOJ, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence
A hearing took place Wednesday, before U.S. District Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan, in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch against the Department of Justice (DOJ).
The case seeks records related to the “Twitter Files,” particularly those involving Hunter Biden’s laptop and allegations of censorship.
The only matter still pending is the FBI’s withholding of records detailing two meetings between agency officials and Twitter representatives from the Biden administration.
Judicial Watch initiated the lawsuit in April 2023, targeting the DOJ, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
The legal action followed the FBI’s failure to respond to a December 2022 FOIA request for communications between FBI personnel and key Twitter figures, including Yoel Roth, Vijaya Gadde, and Jim Baker, from June 2020 to December 2022.
These individuals were involved in discussions about suppressing the New York Post’s Hunter Biden laptop story, as disclosed in journalist Matt Taibbi’s December 2022 “Twitter Files.”
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, expressed strong disappointment: “It is frustrating beyond belief for Judicial Watch to have to go to federal court for basic information on Biden’s abuse of the FBI, using Twitter to censor and monitor Americans.”
Through a mix of FOIA requests and legal action, Judicial Watch continues to document extensive censorship efforts that affected tens of millions of Americans.
In November 2024, it obtained DHS records showing a widespread campaign, by both government and private groups, to police and suppress social media posts concerning election fraud in 2020.
Additional records from June 2024, released through Judicial Watch litigation, revealed that just before and after the 2020 election, state officials flagged alleged misinformation and sent it to entities like the Center for Internet Security, CISA, and the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), a DHS-backed nonprofit known for targeting online election discourse.
In December 2023, DHS documents exposed coordination between CISA and the EIP to conduct “real-time narrative tracking” on major social media platforms in the run-up to the 2020 vote.
Similar records surfaced in November 2023, showing EIP’s influence over platforms such as Google, Twitter, Facebook, TikTok, Pinterest, and Reddit to suppress “disinformation.”
Reprinted with permission from Reclaim The Net.
What Connor Should Say To Oilers: It’s Not You. It’s Me.
Ontario man launches new challenge against province’s latest attempt to ban free expression on roadside billboards
Federal fiscal anchor gives appearance of prudence, fails to back it up
The Passage of Bill C-5 Leaves the Conventional Energy Sector With as Many Questions as Answers
-
Business2 days agoOttawa Funded the China Ferry Deal—Then Pretended to Oppose It
-
COVID-192 days agoNew Peer-Reviewed Study Affirms COVID Vaccines Reduce Fertility
-
MAiD2 days agoCanada’s euthanasia regime is not health care, but a death machine for the unwanted
-
Business1 day agoWorld Economic Forum Aims to Repair Relations with Schwab
-
Alberta2 days agoThe permanent CO2 storage site at the end of the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line is just getting started
-
Alberta1 day agoAlberta’s government is investing $5 million to help launch the world’s first direct air capture centre at Innisfail
-
Business2 days agoMunicipal government per-person spending in Canada hit near record levels
-
Business1 day agoA new federal bureaucracy will not deliver the affordable housing Canadians need