Censorship Industrial Complex
G20’s Online Speech Clampdown Calls Set To Ignite Free Speech Fears

G20 leaders convened in Rio de Janeiro have called for enhanced responsibility and transparency from digital platforms to tackle the growing challenges of “misinformation,” “disinformation,” “hate speech,” and others on their long list of supposed online “harms.”
The summit’s final declaration highlighted the transformative role of digital platforms in global communication but noted the adverse effects of digital content’s rapid spread. It called for increased accountability from platforms to manage speech, which should raise eyebrows among free speech advocates who’ve heard all this before.
We obtained a copy of the declaration for you here.
During the summit, the leaders highlighted the transformative impact of digital platforms in communication and information dissemination across the globe. However, they also alleged negative ramifications of unchecked digital spaces, where “harmful” content can proliferate at an unprecedented pace and scale.
In response, the G20’s final declaration underscored the critical role of digital platforms in ensuring their ecosystems do not become breeding grounds for speech they don’t like.
The declaration states: “We recognize that digital platforms have reshaped the digital ecosystem and online interactions by amplifying information dissemination and facilitating communication within and across geographical boundaries. However, the digitization of the information realm and the accelerated evolution of new technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI), has dramatically impacted the speed, scale, and reach of misinformation and disinformation, hate speech, and other forms of online harms.”
The G20 goes on to say that it emphasizes the “need for digital platforms’ transparency and responsibility in line with relevant policies and applicable legal frameworks and will work with platforms and relevant stakeholders in this regard.”
The declaration even says more measures need to be taken to control what it says is the spread of online misogyny and the need to combat it “online and offline.”
armed forces
Trump admin reveals the federal government awarded over $100 million in contracts to Reuters

From LifeSiteNews
The Pentagon gave $9 million to Reuters for program called ‘large scale social deception’
President Donald Trump highlighted this morning the finding that the Department of Defense (DOD) paid the leftist media outlet Reuters $9 million for a program labeled “large scale social deception,” and he has demanded that they return the money.
“DOGE: Looks like Radical Left Reuters was paid $9,000,000 by the Department of Defense to study ‘large scale social deception.’ GIVE BACK THE MONEY, NOW!” wrote Trump on Truth Social.
Late Wednesday evening, Elon Musk shared a screenshot from USAspending.gov showing that the Department of Defense had indeed dispersed an award to Thomson Reuters Special Services LLC, the parent company of the media group Reuters, for a project labeled “active social engineering defense”(ASED) and “large scale social deception.”
Reuters was paid millions of dollars by the US government for “large scale social deception”.
That is literally what it says on the purchase order! They’re a total scam.
Just wow. https://t.co/GGxoVQSwN8
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 13, 2025
A perusal of USAspending.gov shows that the U.S. government has awarded over $100 million in contracts to Reuters and confirms that the DOD awarded Reuters $9,147,532 under the “description” label ASED and “large scale social deception,” for a time period from 2018 to 2022, part of the period of Trump’s first term.
For comparison, other government contracts to Reuters include the DOD’s awarding of over $12 million under the description “mass effect,” the DHS awarding $5.1 million for “data analysis,” and the Department of Justice (DOJ) giving a few million for “risk mitigation services.”
A more detailed overview of the contract on highergov.com shows the description “SIMULATION TESTING AND MEASUREMENT LARGE SCALE DECEPTION” but does not further expand upon the activities the award intends to fund.
Most of those who commented on Musk’s X post blasted the finding as a straightforward exposure of government deception. One commentator questioned whether the description was purportedly meant to signify defense against “social deception,” as the contract description signified defense against social engineering.
Others pointed out that deception is a standard part of psychological operations, as admitted in an Army field manual, No. 3-13.4, “Army Support to Military Deception”:
Military deception is actions executed to deliberately mislead adversary military, paramilitary, or violent extremist organization decision makers, thereby causing the adversary to take specific actions (or inactions) that will contribute to the accomplishment of the friendly mission. Deception applies to all levels of warfare, across the range of military operations, and is conducted during all phases of military operations. When properly integrated with operations security and other information-related capabilities, deception can be a decisive tool in altering how the enemy views, analyzes, decides, and acts in response to friendly military operations.
Some commentators highlighted the fact that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has used American news media for propaganda purposes, most notably in a project known as “Operation Mockingbird.” At the time, the CIA admittedly hired at least 400 journalists to serve its aims, in part by writing “fake stories,” according to the journalist who exposed the scandal in 1977.
Stunningly, despite the millions it receives in government contracts, Reuters claims to be an “independent” and “stateless” news organization. It states on its website:
Independence is the essence of our reputation as a “stateless” global news organisation and fundamental to the trust that allows us to report impartially from all sides of a conflict or dispute. It is crucial to our ability to report on companies, institutions and individuals in the financial markets, many of whom are also our customers, without regard for anything other than accuracy, balance and the truth. Our independence stems not only from the structure of Reuters but also from our duty as journalists to avoid conflicts of interest or situations that could give rise to a perception of a conflict.
Censorship Industrial Complex
UK Could Weaken Online Censorship Law To Avoid US Trade Battle

As European leaders scramble to shield their economies from impending US tariffs, the UK’s Labour government appears ready to make significant concessions. Facing the risk of economic fallout, Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s administration has reportedly signaled to Washington that it is open to revising the controversial and dangerous Online Safety Act — legislation critics have described as an aggressive censorship regime.
The Act, which gives UK regulators the power to fine tech companies for failing to remove vaguely defined “harmful content,” has been a major point of contention between the two allies and has become a major threat to free speech online. The Trump administration has been especially vocal in its opposition, viewing the law as an affront to free speech and a potential financial burden on US tech giants.
According to The Telegraph:
“Downing Street is willing to renegotiate elements of the Act in order to strike a trade deal, should it be raised by the US, The Telegraph understands. The law has been heavily criticized by free speech advocates and economists, who argue its broad provisions to tackle harmful online content could lead to excessive censorship and deter investment from American tech giants.”
The Online Safety Act arms UK media regulator Ofcom with sweeping new authority over social media platforms, enabling the imposition of multimillion-pound fines for failing to police content according to government directives. While supporters claim the law is necessary to protect users, critics argue that its vague wording and punitive approach encourage preemptive censorship — where platforms remove lawful content simply to avoid regulatory punishment.
President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has intensified scrutiny of the law. The president, who has been highly critical of social media censorship, has surrounded himself with influential voices in the tech world, including Elon Musk, whose platform, X, is already preparing to challenge Ofcom’s authority.
“Another source close to the Trump’s (sic) administration suggested the act was viewed as ‘Orwellian’ in the US and could become a flashpoint in negotiations. ‘To many people that are currently in power, they feel the United Kingdom has become a dystopian, Orwellian place where people have to keep silent about things that aren’t fashionable,’ they said. ‘The administration hate it [Online Safety Act]. Congress has been saying that [it is a concern] ever since it was enacted. Those in the administration are saying the exact same thing.’”
Musk has publicly condemned the Act, and with Ofcom set to gain new enforcement powers in March, tensions between US tech firms and the UK government are likely to escalate. The entrepreneur recently welcomed Trump’s presidency as a potential counterweight to the UK’s regulatory crackdown.
Free speech advocates on both sides of the Atlantic have long warned that Britain’s approach to online regulation represents a stark departure from the First Amendment protections enjoyed in the US. The Free Speech Union and groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) argue that the law’s restrictions on “harmful but legal” speech will lead to widespread content suppression, limiting open debate and investigative journalism.
Lord Young of Acton, the founder of the Free Speech Union, underscored the looming confrontation between UK regulators and US tech leaders:
“If that happens, Trump will side with his tech bros and tell Sir Keir that if he wants a trade deal, he’ll call off his dogs.”
Labour has previously doubled down on online regulation, with its election manifesto promising additional measures to “keep everyone safe online.” However, in the face of potential US trade repercussions, the government’s stance appears to be softening.
From Washington’s perspective, the Online Safety Act has become an obstacle to trade negotiations, raising concerns that UK regulatory overreach could deter American investment. Andrew Hale, a trade policy expert at the Heritage Foundation, confirmed that this issue has been a recurring theme in discussions with US officials.
“Every meeting I have to discuss trade policy with people either in the administration or Congress, they always raise that. They say, ‘This is a huge roadblock’.”
With Ofcom’s enforcement powers set to take effect soon, Britain faces a fundamental choice: cling to its stringent online censorship policies or prioritize economic cooperation with the US. The decision could shape the future of free speech in the UK for years to come.
|
|
You subscribe to Reclaim The Net because you value free speech and privacy. Each issue we publish is a commitment to defend these critical rights, providing insights and actionable information to protect and promote liberty in the digital age.
Despite our wide readership, less than 0.2% of our readers contribute financially. With your support, we can do more than just continue; we can amplify voices that are often suppressed and spread the word about the urgent issues of censorship and surveillance. Consider making a modest donation — just $5, or whatever amount you can afford. Your contribution will empower us to reach more people, educate them about these pressing issues, and engage them in our collective cause. Thank you for considering a contribution. Each donation not only supports our operations but also strengthens our efforts to challenge injustices and advocate for those who cannot speak out. Thank you.
|
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days ago
New House task force seeks to declassify 9/11 files, Epstein client list, JFK assassination, UFOs
-
Business2 days ago
Crazy government spending
-
illegal immigration1 day ago
Trump border czar dismisses Pope’s attack on immigration policy
-
Business2 days ago
Hegseth welcomes DOGE to the Pentagon, says national debt a security issue
-
Business2 days ago
Ottawa Appoints Former Trudeau Intelligence Adviser as “Fentanyl Czar”
-
armed forces1 day ago
Pierre Poilievre promises to cut Canada’s funding of global projects overseas
-
Business1 day ago
Lower taxes will help increase living standards for Canadian families
-
International2 days ago
“Trump is a hero”: Marc Fogel lands in U.S. after release from Russian captivity