Their taxpayer-backed conclusions: the state should have total access to data to make searching speech easier, speech offenders should be put in a “holding area,” and government should probably restrict disinformation, “even if it means losing some freedom.” Thus began the Censorship Industrial Complex (CIC) in earnest.
Twitter was a government partner censoring Americans. Agencies sent in spreadsheets with hundreds of thousands of accounts to review for censorship.
Many were sharing misinformation, but they weren’t Russian disinformation. Many produced little evidence of disinformation. Some YouTube accounts were simply flagged for being “anti-Ukraine.”
The Censorship Industrial Complex (CIC)
The government mostly used third-party companies to do their dirty work.
The journalists came to think of the groupings of state agencies like DHS, FBI, or the Global Engagement Center (GEC), along with “NGOs that aren’t academic” and an unexpectedly aggressive partner, commercial news media – as the Censorship-Industrial Complex.”
Twitter, Facebook, Google, and other companies developed a formal system for taking in moderation “requests” from every corner of government: the FBI, DHS, HHS, DOD, the Global Engagement Center at State, even the CIA. For every government agency scanning Twitter, there were perhaps 20 quasi-private entities doing the same, including Stanford’s Election Integrity Project, Newsguard, the Global Disinformation Index, National Endowment for Democracy, the Atlantic Council’s DFRLab, Hamilton 68’s creator – the Alliance for Securing Democracy, others, many taxpayer-funded.”
A report at a meeting of the Aspen Institute was co-authored by Katie Couric and Chris Krebs, the founder of the DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). Yoel Roth of Twitter and Nathaniel Gleicher of Facebook were technical advisors. Prince Harry joined Couric as a Commissioner.
Their taxpayer-backed conclusions: the state should have total access to data to make searching speech easier, speech offenders should be put in a “holding area,” and government should probably restrict disinformation, “even if it means losing some freedom.”
-
The Importance of Prayer: How a Christian Gold Company Stands Out by Defending Americans’ Retirement
NEWSGUARD
There is so much to unpack. But one NGO, a member of the CIC, needs special attention – Newsguard. They are funded by the Department of Defense. Newsguard has done tremendous damage. It is run by a friend and former employee of George Soros’s. They are vicious. Another group, Media Bias Fack Check follows their guidance. The man who runs Media Bias – Mr. Van Zandt – suggested I had to get right with them before I’d get right with him (not his exact words). I had high reliability and high factual content before Newsguard started knocking the Sentinel.
The teachers’ union is in partnership with Newsguard. That is probably where they do a lot of damage.
25. Some NGOs, like the GEC-funded Global Disinformation Index or the DOD-funded Newsguard, not only seek content moderation but apply subjective “risk” or “reliability” scores to media outlets, which can result in reduction in revenue. Do we want government in this role? pic.twitter.com/s9tobM9rf8
— Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) March 9, 2023
Check out how corrupt CIC member Stanford is here.
1. TWITTER FILES:
Statement to Congress
THE CENSORSHIP-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX pic.twitter.com/JLryjnINXS— Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) March 9, 2023
wpDiscuz
