On Monday, Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told reporters that federal agencies such as the FBI and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA) restarted discussions with Big Tech platforms. In accordance with NextGov/FCW, this coordination will focus on “removing disinformation from their sites as the November presidential election approaches.” Warner said those talks resumed in March, at the same time as oral arguments Murthy v. Missouri — which focuses on federal censorship efforts — were heard before the US Supreme Court.
When pressed about the validity of Warner's comments, an FBI representative confirmed to The Federalist that the agency has resumed communications with social media companies ahead of the 2024 election.
“The FBI remains committed to combating foreign malign influence operations, including in connection with our elections. This effort includes sharing specific information about foreign threats with state and local election officials and private sector companies when appropriate and as strict with the law,” said the representative. “In coordination with the Department of Justice, the FBI recently implemented procedures to facilitate the sharing of information about foreign malign influence with social media companies in a way that reinforces that private companies are free to decide to themselves if and how to take action on this information.
CISA foreign affairs specialist Tess Hyre declined The Federalist's request for comment on whether the agency has resumed discussions with social media companies to combat what she says is “disinformation,” but said CISA Director Jen Easterly will participate in an “Electoral Security.” “audience in “the next few weeks”.
Neither the FBI nor CISA responded when pressed when they restarted communications with the social media companies about efforts to remove posts containing so-called “disinformation” from their platforms. The FBI and CISA did not identify the specific companies they are working with in these efforts. Neither agency responded when asked about how they determine what constitutes “misinformation” or with which other federal agencies they collaborate in these efforts to remove “disinformation” from social media platforms.
The issue of government-enforced censorship is front and center Murthy v. Missouria case before SCOTUS focused on Missouri and Louisiana complaints rather than the federal government's pressing of social media companies to censor free speech online is a violation of the First Amendment. U.S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty issued a July 2023 preliminary order prohibiting federal agencies from colluding with Big Tech to censor publications they don't like. In his ruling, Doughty wrote, “If the allegations made by the plaintiffs are true, the present case involves the most massive attack on free speech in the history of the United States.”
Subsequently, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals maintained Doughty's term in September. Although the initial ruling did not pertain to CISA, it is often referred to by its critics as “nerve center” of the federal government's censorship operations — the court later issued a corrected sentence to prevent CISA from colluding with Big Tech to crush free speech online. The US Supreme Court, however, get up the Fifth Circuit's demand in October, effectively allowing the federal government's censorship operations resume while considering the merits of the case.
SCOTUS is expected to issue a final decision on the merits of Murthy v. Missouri this summer.
[READ: 8 Shocking Takeaways From Landmark Murthy v. Missouri Censorship Case]
Largely ignored by the legacy media, the collusion between the federal government and Big Tech to silence online speech that the feds disapprove of is extensive and unprecedented. For example, the Biden administration pressed Social media companies for censoring Covid-related posts they saw as “misinformation” shortly after coming to power, even if those posts contained information that is true.
Discovered emails Murthy v. Missouri indicate that health agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) regularly held a “disinformation/denial meeting”[s]” with Facebook to discuss the latter's censorship efforts.
But these efforts are only one facet of the government's censorship operations. CISA regularly ease meetings “between big tech companies and national security and law enforcement agencies to address 'misinformation, misinformation and misinformation' on social media platforms.”
Ahead of the 2020 election, for example, the agency ramped up its censorship efforts by flagging posts by Big Tech companies it said deserved to be censored, some of which called into question the security of voting practices , such as unsupervised bulk mailing. election. This was done despite CISA acknowledging in private the risks associated with these practices.
Neither the FBI nor CISA responded to The Federalist's request for comment on whether social media posts highlighting the risks of mail-in voting would be flagged as “disinformation.”
An interim report released by House Republicans in November revealed that the CISA censorship enterprise was more extensive than previously known. According to this analysis, CISA, along with that of the State Department Global Engagement Center (GEC) – partnered with Stanford University to pressure Big Tech companies to censor what they said was “disinformation” during the 2020 election.
At the heart of this operation was the Association for Electoral Integrity (EIP)“a consortium of 'disinformation' academics” led by Stanford's Internet Observatory that coordinated with DHS and GEC “to monitor and censor Americans' online speech” ahead of the 2020 contest.
Created “at the request” of CISA, EIP allowed federal officials to “launder.” [their] censorship activities in hopes of bypassing both the First Amendment and public scrutiny.” As stated in the interim report, this operation tried to censor “factual information, jokes and satire, and political opinions” and sent flagged posts by prominent conservative figures to Big Tech companies for censorship. Among the targets were The Federalist's Mollie Hemingway and Sean Davis.
The feds also played an important role pressing social media companies censor the New York Post bomb report about the business dealings of the Biden family before the 2020 election.
Shawn Fleetwood is a writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for the State Action Convention, and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood
Español de Venezuela 
English 