A court battle over censorship between Elon Musk and the Australian government will have massive ramifications for global free speech and journalism, Daily Wire host Michael Knowles said on Wednesday in an X thread.
In the thread, Knowles explained how Australia’s e-Safety Commissioner, which he first warned about in January 2023, has been battling Musk’s X for months over the removal of posts related to transgenderism. Recently, the e-Safety Commissioner has taken on X over posts that contain videos of the stabbing of a Christian bishop in Sydney earlier this month. Australia’s government has threatened to fine X over half a million dollars per day if it does not remove videos of the stabbing not only in Australia but for X users across the world.
Knowles said that the Australian government appears to be specifically targeting X for enforcement because of the platform&#8217;s allowance for independent research and journalism, as opposed to legacy media. The Daily Wire host argued that the moves from Australia’s e-Safety Commissioner, backed by top politicians, were part of an effort to “silence citizens and journalists worldwide.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ElonMusk</a> is in a battle against the Australian government to stop the World Economic Forum from silencing citizens and independent journalists worldwide. Here’s everything you need to know: 🧵
&mdash; Michael Knowles (@michaeljknowles) <a href="https://twitter.com/michaeljknowles/status/1783209299726250304?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 24, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Australia’s e-Safety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, is a dual American and Australian citizen who previously worked at Twitter. Grant is a proponent of the World Economic Forum’s so-called “Safety by Design” initiative, an initiative Knowles predicted in January 2023 would lead to censorship.
X responded to Grant’s order to remove the stabbing footage by disabling the content in Australia, but Musk refused to make the videos unavailable for X users across the world. The bishop who was the victim of the stabbing attack has sided with Musk and said he wants the videos to remain on X.
“While X respects the right of a country to enforce its laws within its jurisdiction, the eSafety Commissioner does not have the authority to dictate what content X’s users can see globally. We will robustly challenge this unlawful and dangerous approach in court,” X <a href="https://twitter.com/GlobalAffairs/status/1781342060668174707" target="_blank" rel="noopener">noted</a>. “Global takedown orders go against the very principles of a free and open internet and threaten free speech everywhere.”
Top Australian officials have weighed in, with one senator calling for Musk to be jailed and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese saying that the government is “prepared to take whatever action is necessary to haul these companies into line.”
The actions to suppress the stabbing video come after the e-Safety commission targeted posts by critics of radical gender ideology, including Reduxx magazine and a Canadian activist known as “Billboard Chris.”
Billboard Chris was targeted after he posted something critical of Teddy Cook, a <a href="https://www.humanrights.unsw.edu.au/research/commentary/pronouns-trans-advocacy" target="_blank" rel="noopener">leftist</a> activist who was recently appointed as an expert on a World Health Organization panel. The post, which was a comment on an article from The Daily Mail on Cook’s sexually themed social media history, was restricted in Australia, but Musk announced a lawsuit against the government over the censorship order.
Knowles pointed out that the censorship enforcement did not appear to be extended to others beyond X.
“Is eSafety fining Daily Mail $1M every 2 days for their Teddy Cook article? Or YouTube for hosting NBC&#8217;s church stabbing video? It doesn’t appear so. It appears that the WEF’s plot to impose eSafety on the world is targeted at you, at me, and at the place we can speak: X,” Knowles wrote on his X thread. “And so, the fate of global speech stands to be decided in a Kangaroo Court battle between a WEF-backed American lady who moved to Australia to censor the Internet and a South African man who moved to America who’s telling her she can’t.”

Michael Knowles/Australian Flag

Michael Knowles Reveals Global Impact Of Australia’s Speech Battle With Elon Musk

Australia

Elon Musk

Free Speech

Michael Knowles

Twitter

NPR&#8217;s president and CEO said she abandoned the idea of a &#8220;free and open&#8221; internet as the mission of Wikipedia, which she used to lead, because it is a &#8220;white, male, Westernized construct.&#8221;
In a newly resurfaced video clip, Katherine Maher, who took over as NPR&#8217;s chief executive in January says she found Wikpedia&#8217;s &#8220;free and open&#8221; ethos &#8220;inherently limited.&#8221; The clip was posted to X by Christopher Rufo, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute.
Maher served as chief executive at the Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit that operates Wikipedia, from 2019 to 2021.
&#8220;I have come to the opinion and the perspective that &#8216;free and open&#8217; was a way of looking at the world that was inherently limited relative to what we were trying to achieve,&#8221; Maher says in the clip.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
EXCLUSIVE: Katherine Maher says that she abandoned a &quot;free and open&quot; internet as the mission of Wikipedia, because those principles recapitulated a &quot;white male Westernized construct&quot; and &quot;did not end up living into the intentionality of what openness can be.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/Ved9mgGvJH">pic.twitter.com/Ved9mgGvJH</a>
&mdash; Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) <a href="https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1780929268949614848?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 18, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
EXCLUSIVE: Katherine Maher doesn&#39;t just want to &quot;stamp out bad information&quot; on the internet. She wants to replace it with &quot;good information&quot;—i.e., left-wing narratives—and force the public to &quot;sit within that good information&quot; as &quot;a collective.&quot;
Big Sister has arrived. <a href="https://t.co/7kfq8VYHfj">pic.twitter.com/7kfq8VYHfj</a>
&mdash; Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) <a href="https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1781009614584381486?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 18, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
EXCLUSIVE: Katherine Maher says the &quot;the number one challenge&quot; in her fight against disinformation is &quot;the First Amendment in the United States,&quot; which makes it &quot;a little bit tricky&quot; to censor &quot;bad information&quot; and &quot;the influence peddlers&quot; who spread it.
NPR&#39;s censor-in-chief. <a href="https://t.co/0vY6hIpbmO">pic.twitter.com/0vY6hIpbmO</a>
&mdash; Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) <a href="https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1780597079439446250?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 17, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;&#8216;Free and open&#8217; has the best of intentionality, but in the end what &#8216;free and open&#8217; often ended up doing, and particularly in the case of Wikipedia, was recapitulating many of the same power structures and dynamics that exist offline, prior to the advent of the internet,&#8221; Maher said.
One of the problems with Wikipedia is the way it relies on a &#8220;written tradition&#8221; and &#8220;reliable sources,&#8221; Maher said.
&#8220;You see the exclusion of communities, of languages because of the ways in which Wikipedia is based on reliable sources. The idea of a written tradition, which is particular to some cultures and not to others,&#8221; the former Wikimedia CEO said.
&#8220;The ways in which we ascribe notability often really comes from sort of this white, male, Westernized construct around who matters in societies and who is elevated and whose voices. And so some of these ideas of sort of this radical openness really did not end up living into the intentionality of what openness can be,&#8221; she said.
X owner Elon Musk responded to the clip, <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1780962477011796287" target="_blank" rel="noopener">posting</a>, &#8220;That’s literally the point of Wikipedia.&#8221;
Maher has recently come under fire from conservatives after a former NPR editor blew the whistle on the outlet&#8217;s liberal bias. Former editor Uri Berliner resigned Wednesday after NPR suspended him.
In the wake of the NPR editor&#8217;s accusations, a slew of since-deleted tweets and previous statements from Maher have surfaced, adding fuel to the outrage.
In another clip posted by Rufo, Maher says she is interested in how we can &#8220;immerse ourself in good information,&#8221; not just &#8220;stamp out bad information.&#8221;
In yet another clip, Maher says the &#8220;number one challenge&#8221; for her in fighting disinformation is the First Amendment, which she calls a &#8220;fairly robust protection of rights.&#8221;
&#8220;It also means that it is a little bit tricky to really address some of the real challenges of where does bad information come from,&#8221; she said.
She has been accused of expressing explicitly biased views in her previous tweets.
In 2018, Maher <a href="https://nypost.com/2024/04/13/us-news/nprs-new-ceo-katherine-mahers-woke-tweets-arise-as-editor-claims-bias/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">posted</a>, “Donald Trump is a racist.”
In 2020 she wrote, &#8220;I mean, sure, looting is counterproductive. But it’s hard to be mad about protests not prioritizing the private property of a system of oppression founded on treating people’s ancestors as private property.&#8221;

Web Summit Lisbon 2023

‘White, Male, Westernized’: NPR President Said She Opposed Wikipedia’s ‘Free And Open’ Mission

'White, Male, Westernized': NPR President Said She Opposed Wikipedia's 'Free And Open' Mission

Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI)

First Amendment

National Public Radio (NPR)

Wikipedia

Woke Culture

Wokeness

Elon Musk plans to file a free speech lawsuit against the Australian government after it demanded that X remove a post critical of a radical transgender-identifying activist it claimed violated the government’s eSafety policies. 
Musk’s plan comes after the Australian government’s eSafety Commissioner, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/michael-knowles-uncovers-wefs-sinister-threat-to-free-speech" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Julie Inman-Grant,</a> told Chris Elston, a Canadian opponent of gender ideology known by the name Billboard Chris, to take down a post that was critical of Australian activist Teddy Cook. Additionally, Australia threatened X with an $800,000 AUD fine if the post was not removed. Cook is a <a href="https://www.humanrights.unsw.edu.au/research/commentary/pronouns-trans-advocacy" target="_blank" rel="noopener">leftist</a> activist who was recently appointed as an expert on a World Health Organization panel. 
“Earlier this week, X was ordered by the Australian E-Safety Commissioner, subject to an approximately $800,000 AUD fine, to remove a user&#8217;s post,” X’s Global Government Affairs Team said. “The post had criticized an individual appointed by the World Health Organization to serve as an expert on transgender issues.”
“X is withholding the post in Australia in compliance with the order but intends to file a legal challenge to the order to protect its user&#8217;s right to free speech,” X said. 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Earlier this week, X was ordered by the Australian E-Safety Commissioner, subject to an approximately $800,000 AUD fine, to remove a user&#39;s post. The post had criticized an individual appointed by the World Health Organization to serve as an expert on transgender issues. 
X is…
&mdash; Global Government Affairs (@GlobalAffairs) <a href="https://twitter.com/GlobalAffairs/status/1773738656588533856?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 29, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Musk’s battle with Australia comes just over a year after Daily Wire host Michael Knowles warned about the threats to free speech that Commissioner Grant might pose beyond Australia’s borders because of her ideological beliefs and ties to the World Economic Forum. 
In January 2023, Knowles revealed in a lengthy X thread that Grant, who previously suggested a “recalibration” of free speech, had listed hate speech, “dehumanization,” and “individual identity attacks” as “online harms” on the government&#8217;s official eSafety website. Grant also has been part of the World Economic Forum’s “Global Coalition for Digital Safety.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
In this case, I do in fact hate to say I told ya so…
cc: <a href="https://twitter.com/BillboardChris?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@BillboardChris</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@elonmusk</a> <a href="https://t.co/y8w6jtsN35">https://t.co/y8w6jtsN35</a>
&mdash; Michael Knowles (@michaeljknowles) <a href="https://twitter.com/michaeljknowles/status/1773189056836280770?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 28, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Last month, the eSafety Commission <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13258303/Elon-Musk-Australian-government-eSafety-Commissioner.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">took action</a> after Elston commented and shared an <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13119521/Sex-secrets-trans-kinky-Australian-bondage-bestiality-nudism-drugs-sex-change.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">article</a> from The Daily Mail that said Cook had a social media page filled with public nudity, bondage parties, trans orgies, and even a photo of a person appearing to have sex with a dog. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
After sharing the article, Elston was sent a letter from the Australia eSafety Commission telling him to remove the post.  
“An ordinary reasonable person in the position of the Complainant would regard the Material as being offensive,” the letter said. “&#8217;This is because the Material singles out the Complainant to personify the poster&#8217;s contempt for transgender identity as well as equating transgender identity with a psychiatric condition.”
Elston refused to take the post down, saying he was not guilty of what the Australian government accused him of, and announced on Wednesday that he had <a href="https://twitter.com/BillboardChris/status/1775600390681264403" target="_blank" rel="noopener">appealed</a> the takedown order. 
X has blocked the post in Australia while it pursues legal action against the country.

MixCollage-04-Apr-2024-12-29-PM-8778

Musk Battles Australian eSafety Office Exposed by Michael Knowles As Global Threat To Free Speech

Social Issues

Transgender

World

Women who are critical of gender ideology are slamming Scotland&#8217;s new hate speech law, saying it restricts them from voicing their views on biological sex.
The new <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ssi/2024/82/contents/made" target="_blank" rel="noopener">law</a>, the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021, went into effect on Monday. The measure criminalizes &#8220;stirring up hatred&#8221; relating to age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity, or being intersex.
The maximum penalty for violations is seven years in jail.
Critics quickly spoke out against the law, saying it risks jailing people for voicing their sincerely held opinions, particularly those critical of gender ideology.
Under the law, a person may not communicate material or behave in a way that &#8220;a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive&#8221; with the intention of stirring up hatred based on the newly protected characteristics.
Racially-based hatred was already outlawed in Scotland, but the new law adds more protected categories.
Many voiced their opposition to the law on social media, posting under the hashtags #FactIsNotHate and #WomenWontWheesht — &#8220;wheesht&#8221; meaning &#8220;hush&#8221; in Scotland.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Women have been out and about in Scotland with our Hate Crime posters. Women&#39;s Rights Are Not A Hate Crime. Here&#39;s some fabulous women <a href="https://twitter.com/ff_scotland?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ff_scotland</a> Alloa Festival. We will not be silenced!<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FactIsNotHate?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FactIsNotHate</a> <a href="https://t.co/pIsWO2pesD">pic.twitter.com/pIsWO2pesD</a>
&mdash; WRN Scotland (@WRNScotland) <a href="https://twitter.com/WRNScotland/status/1774696700923256964?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 1, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I will not lie. I will not betray women. Our rights matter. We are defiant. We will not be silent. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FactIsNotHate?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FactIsNotHate</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TruthIsNotACrime?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TruthIsNotACrime</a><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FactIsNotACrime?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FactIsNotACrime</a> <a href="https://t.co/KsjUCDDrEZ">pic.twitter.com/KsjUCDDrEZ</a>
&mdash; Cathy Larkman 💚🤍 💜🦢🏃‍♀️ (@JackMerched) <a href="https://twitter.com/JackMerched/status/1774581852562423931?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 31, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
We’ll be continuing to go about our lives speaking the truth. We won’t be silenced by the Hate Crime Bill ✊✊✊<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TruthIsNotACrime?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TruthIsNotACrime</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FactIsNotHate?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FactIsNotHate</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FactIsNotACrime?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FactIsNotACrime</a> <a href="https://t.co/kRNMHwHDKE">pic.twitter.com/kRNMHwHDKE</a>
&mdash; GTF Glasgow Tactical Feminists (@GTFGla) <a href="https://twitter.com/GTFGla/status/1774689482798694786?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 1, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
&#8220;I will not lie. I will not betray women. Our rights matter. We are defiant. We will not be silent,&#8221; wrote one social media user on X.
&#8220;A Woman is an Adult Human Female,&#8221; another <a href="https://twitter.com/Your_mums_aTerf/status/1774578740023939220" target="_blank" rel="noopener">posted</a>. &#8220;The law can not protect what it can not define. My son claims he&#8217;s a woman, he is not. It is my protected belief humans can not change sex.&#8221;
&#8220;Men are not women. Will this statement now result in arrest in Scotland? Indefinite seizure of devices? Hate crime incidents secretly recorded? A dystopian nightmare, brought about in the name of &#8216;inclusion&#8217;. Shame on you #Scotland,&#8221; another user <a href="https://twitter.com/brandubh4/status/1774585540752318872" target="_blank" rel="noopener">posted</a>.
Some X users tagged the Scottish police in their posts.
Author J.K. Rowling <a href="https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1774747068944265615">challenged</a> police to arrest her over her posts criticizing gender ideology.
&#8220;Freedom of speech and belief are at an end in Scotland if the accurate description of biological sex is deemed criminal,&#8221; Rowling posted Monday on X, adding that, &#8220;if what I&#8217;ve written here qualifies as an offence under the terms of the new act, I look forward to being arrested.&#8221;
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Rowling added that Scottish lawmakers &#8220;seem to have placed higher value on the feelings of men performing their idea of femaleness, however misogynistically or opportunistically, than on the rights and freedoms of actual women and girls.&#8221;
She said the new legislation is &#8220;wide open to abuse by activists who wish to silence&#8221; women who criticize gender ideology.
&nbsp;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
🎉🌼🌸April Fools! 🌸🌼🎉
Only kidding. Obviously, the people mentioned in the above tweets aren&#39;t women at all, but men, every last one of them.
In passing the Scottish Hate Crime Act, Scottish lawmakers seem to have placed higher value on the feelings of men performing their…
&mdash; J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) <a href="https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1774749954629652873?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 1, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Elon Musk criticized the law as well.
&#8220;An example of why it is so important to preserve freedom of speech,&#8221; Musk <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1770032208662663278" target="_blank" rel="noopener">posted</a> earlier this month on X in response to another post discussing the law.

People holding transgender flags

Women Gender Ideology Critics Protest Scotland’s Hate Crime Act

Women Gender Ideology Critics Protest Scotland's Hate Crime Act

Gender

Hate Crime

Hate Speech

JK Rowling

Scotland

The <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/south-carolina" target="_blank" rel="noopener">South Carolina</a> House of Representatives passed a bill on Wednesday that would prohibit public universities from making hiring or promotion decisions based on diversity, equity, and inclusion principles or political ideology.
The <a href="https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess125_2023-2024/prever/4289_20240327.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">bill</a>, which passed 84-30 with opposition from Democrats and support from Republicans, also protects the free speech of both students and staff at public universities and requires universities to report on how much money they spend on DEI initiatives. Conservative members of the South Carolina legislature have <a href="https://scdailygazette.com/2024/03/28/sc-house-gop-passes-bill-banning-dei-in-college-hiring-firing-and-admission/#:~:text=The%20bill%20bars%20discriminating%20against,and%20how%20they%20were%20resolved." target="_blank" rel="noopener">previously pushed</a> to strip all DEI-related funding from public universities. 
“In a decisive move, SC House Republicans have passed H.4289, signaling a clear stance against DEI ideology influencing college admissions and employment decisions,” the South Carolina House Republican Caucus <a href="https://www.facebook.com/SCHouseGOP/posts/pfbid0AN73SD5kbSGmQcyLq1Ky4DsFzsD1aH3sqym8q3tdZnhxcWujyCdtVgouqww8DF9Al">said</a> in a statement. “This landmark legislation ensures no diversity pledges can dictate admissions or job outcomes, halts mandatory diversity training, and upholds the unassailable right to free speech. It&#8217;s a bold affirmation of our commitment to equality and academic freedom, safeguarding our institutions against bias and promoting fairness in line with federal laws and standards.”
“A public institution of higher learning shall not infringe on a student, faculty member, or employee&#8217;s First Amendment right to free speech,” <a href="https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess125_2023-2024/prever/4289_20240327.htm">the bill</a> says. “A public institution of higher learning shall not discriminate on the basis of viewpoint discrimination.”
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1711722593099000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2BYobdhGnzBnBpziY8U6Zu">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
During debate on the measure, state Republican Rep. Adam Morgan said that taxpayer money should not be used to push a politicized worldview on students. 
“We’re asking a question of what our tax dollars should be spent on, because what we spend our money on reflects our values,” he <a href="https://scdailygazette.com/2024/03/28/sc-house-gop-passes-bill-banning-dei-in-college-hiring-firing-and-admission/#:~:text=The%20bill%20bars%20discriminating%20against,and%20how%20they%20were%20resolved." target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a>.
South Carolina House Democrats <a href="https://twitter.com/SCHouseDems/status/1773122593895108611?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1773122593895108611%7Ctwgr%5Ec1acd923c809e19fd0862d806d55bb7f609b916d%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fabcnews4.com%2Fnews%2Flocal%2Fsouth-carolina-house-advances-controversial-anti-dei-bill-in-party-line-vote-south-carolina-democrat-republican-diversity-equity-inclusion-2024" target="_blank" rel="noopener">claimed</a> the bill is part of a push toward a “far right effort to make our college campuses less diverse, less equitable, and less inclusive.”
The measure now heads to the Senate for consideration where Republicans hold 30 seats and Democrats have 15. 
Other states, like Florida and Alabama, have passed more wide-ranging measures cracking down on DEI. Last week, Republican Alabama Governor Kay Ivey <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/alabama-governor-signs-law-to-ban-dei-programs-at-public-universities" target="_blank" rel="noopener">signed</a> a law that bans state funding of DEI programs at state agencies and public universities.

South Carolina State House

South Carolina House Passes Bill To Keep Universities From Hiring Based On DEI Principles

Discrimination

Politics

South Carolina

A first grader who made a drawing that included the words “Black Lives Mater [sic]” with “any life” underneath was punished by her school.
Her mother sued the school, arguing her daughter’s First Amendment rights were violated, but a California district court ruled that the drawing was not protected speech because educators are given “substantial deference as to what speech is appropriate.”
The little girl, referred to only as B.B. in <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.876261/gov.uscourts.cacd.876261.92.0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the court documents</a>, drew the picture and gave it to another student, referred to only as M.C., who is apparently a student of color. M.C.’s mother saw the drawing and emailed the school, saying she trusted that the school would address the drawing.
The background provided in the judge&#8217;s ruling said that on the day M.C.’s mother emailed the school, B.B. was approached by the school’s principal during recess and told the drawing was “inappropriate” and “racist,” though the school disputes telling her it was racist. B.B. was told she could not draw anymore and that she must apologize to M.C., which B.B. did, twice.
After recess, B.B. was told by her teachers that she would not be allowed to play during recess for two weeks, but was not told why, according to the documents. There is also no evidence the principal directed the teachers to further punish B.B.
B.B.’s mother insisted that the punishment violated B.B.’s constitutional right to free speech, but the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California’s Southern Division ruled the opposite.
Citing previous case law, the court said that students don’t “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate,&#8221; but that their rights also are &#8220;not automatically coextensive with the rights of adults in other settings.&#8221;
Further, the court cited case law arguing that the First Amendment must be “applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment” and that educators understand those needs best.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1711117030988000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1TK6y-udiFbXey2vkVM2ue">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
The court cited Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. School Dist., which held that schools could restrict speech that “might reasonably lead school authorities to forecast substantial disruption of or material interference with school activities” or that infringes on “the rights of other students to be secure and let alone.” The court also said that educators have &#8220;greater leeway&#8221; in regulating speech &#8220;directed at a &#8216;particularly vulnerable&#8217; student based on a &#8216;core identifying characteristic,&#8217; such as race, sex, religion, or sexual orientation &#8230;&#8221;
The court argued that by giving the drawing to M.C., described as a “particularly vulnerable” student because of her skin color, the school acted reasonably in regulating B.B.’s free speech. The court also said that the drawing interfered with the school environment.
“Younger students may be more sensitive than older students, so their educational experience may be more affected when they receive messages based on a protected characteristic,” the court argued. “Relatedly, first graders are impressionable. If other students join in on the insults, the disruption could metastasize, affecting the learning opportunities of even more students.”
The California court argued the phrase &#8220;any life&#8221; to be “similar to ‘All Lives Matter,’ a sentence with an inclusive denotation but one that is widely perceived as racially insensitive and belittling when directed at people of color.”
In her own testimony, B.B. said she gave the drawing to M.C. to make her feel comfortable after learning about Martin Luther King Jr. in class. It is also unclear how M.C. felt about the drawing, given that it was her mother who emailed the school after finding the drawing in M.C.’s backpack.
Eugene Volokh, a UCLA law professor, <a href="https://reason.com/volokh/2024/03/19/black-lives-matter-any-life-drawing-not-protected-by-the-first-amendment-in-first-grade/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a> that he found the court’s ruling “unconstitutional, even in first grade.”
“[T]he court&#8217;s view here seems to be that this viewpoint—simply because it ‘can be seen’ as dissenting from what some see as the only proper response to racial problems—is stripped of First Amendment protection,” Volokh wrote. “The ‘Black Lives Matter’ slogan is accepted as the one orthodoxy, and any perceived dissent from the view that black lives should be specially stressed in this context can be forbidden.”

Black Lives Matter Logo

First Grader Punished After Drawing ‘BLM’ With ‘Any Life’ Underneath. A Court Ruled Free Speech Doesn’t Protect Her.

First Grader Punished After Drawing 'BLM' With 'Any Life' Underneath. A Court Ruled Free Speech Doesn't Protect Her.

California

Lawsuit

U.S.

President Joe Biden&#8217;s sole contribution to the Supreme Court — Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson — made headlines during her confirmation hearing when she <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/yes-judge-ketanji-brown-jackson-can-define-woman-the-woke-left-just-wont-let-her" target="_blank" rel="noopener">failed to define</a> the word &#8220;woman.&#8221;
On Monday, she made headlines again — this time because during oral arguments in the social media censorship case <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/appeals-court-rules-biden-officials-violated-first-amendment-in-social-media-censorship-case" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Murthy v. Missouri</a>, she voiced concerns over the fact that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was doing exactly what it was designed to do: restraining the federal government.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
KBJ doubles down: “My biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the government in significant ways.”
That is, quite literally, the entire point of the First Amendment—of the entire Bill of Rights. <a href="https://t.co/gWMCaHDG1W">pic.twitter.com/gWMCaHDG1W</a>
&mdash; System Update (@SystemUpdate_) <a href="https://twitter.com/SystemUpdate_/status/1769753959315427812?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 18, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Speaking to Louisiana Solicitor General Benjamin Aguiñaga, Jackson said, &#8220;My biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the government in significant ways in the most important time periods.&#8221;
She went on to suggest that she believed there were occasions when government should have the power — and, in fact, had a duty — to dictate what could and could not be posted on social media, and she &#8220;worried&#8221; that a strict reading of the First Amendment could threaten to rein that in.
&#8220;You seem to be suggesting that that duty cannot manifest itself in the government encouraging or even pressuring platforms to take down harmful information. So, can you help me?&#8221; Jackson continued. &#8220;Because I’m really worried about that because you’ve got the First Amendment operating in an environment of threatening circumstances, from the government’s perspective, and you’re saying that the government can’t interact with the source of those problems.&#8221;
&#8220;Our position is not that the government can’t interact with the platforms there. They can and they should in certain circumstances like that, that present such dangerous issues for society and especially young people. But the way they do that has to be in compliance with the First Amendment. And I think that means they can give them all the true information that the platform needs and ask to amplify that,&#8221; Aguiñaga replied.
Jackson was not quite finished, however, and she argued that certain situations — such as the COVID pandemic — warranted the government stepping in &#8220;to ensure, for example, that the public has accurate information in the context of a once-in-a-lifetime pandemic.&#8221;
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) responded to Jackson&#8217;s assessment, noting that in the case of the pandemic, the information the government had suppressed had turned out to be accurate — and pointing out that her chief complaint about the First Amendment appeared to be that it was working as the Founders had intended it to.
&#8220;She said you&#8217;ve got the First Amendment &#8216;hamstringing the government.&#8217; Well, that&#8217;s what it&#8217;s supposed to do, for goodness sake. It was literally one of the craziest things I&#8217;ve ever seen, that you could have a Supreme Court Justice say that in the oral argument made no sense to me,&#8221; Jordan said. &#8220;That is frightening because if she really believes that, that is scary where we are heading. Understand what took place here. This was censorship by surrogate. This was big government telling big tech to take down speech that they disagreed with, and it was the most fundamental kind of speech. It was political speech.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Jim Jordan Rips Ketanji Brown Jackson&#39;s Concern about the First Amendment: &quot;Hamstringing the Government&quot;<a href="https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Jim_Jordan</a>: &quot;She said you&#39;ve got the First Amendment &#39;hamstringing the government.&#39; Well, that&#39;s what it&#39;s supposed to do, for goodness sake. It was literally one of the… <a href="https://t.co/OhqA0vXKon">pic.twitter.com/OhqA0vXKon</a>
&mdash; KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) <a href="https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1769820119218463038?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 18, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Senate Holds Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings For Ketanji Brown Jackson

Biden’s Only SCOTUS Pick Can’t Define ‘Woman,’ Objects To The First Amendment

Biden's Only SCOTUS Pick Can't Define 'Woman,' Objects To The First Amendment

General

Joe Biden

Ketanji Brown Jackson

Supreme Court

What Is A Woman

On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court warned public officials could get in trouble for blocking critics on social media.
The case arose after James Freed created a private Facebook profile before 2008, later converting his profile to a public “page.” In 2014, Freed updated his Facebook page to note his new job as city manager of Port Huron, Michigan, but still posted about his personal life. He also posted information related to his job, responded to comments on his posts, and occasionally deleted comments that he considered “derogatory” or “stupid.”
After the COVID–19 pandemic began, Freed posted personal and job-related posts related to it. Facebook user Kevin Lindke commented on some of Freed’s posts, saying he disagreed with the city’s COVID policies. At first, Freed deleted Lindke’s comments, and later blocked him from commenting. Lindke then sued, claiming Freed had violated his First Amendment rights and that he had the right to comment because the page was a public forum.
The District Court ruled for Freed in Lindke v. Freed; the Sixth Circuit affirmed the decision.
“[T]he Court warned that public officials face a high risk of liability when they operate a ‘mixed use’ social media page (i.e., posting both public and private topics) and block people from that page,” JDSupra.com <a href="https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/supreme-court-issues-key-decisions-on-5116377/">noted</a>.
The Supreme Court vacated the judgment of the Sixth Circuit and remanded the case for further proceedings, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-611_ap6c.pdf">writing,</a> “A public official who prevents someone from commenting on the official’s social-media page engages in state action under §1983 only if the official both (1) possessed actual authority to speak on the State’s behalf on a particular matter, and (2) purported to exercise that authority when speaking in the relevant social-media posts.”
The Court explained, “Section 1983 provides a cause of action against ‘[e]very person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or us- age, of any State’ deprives someone of a federal constitutional or statutory right. Section 1983’s ‘under color of” text makes clear that it is a provision designed as a protection against acts attributable to a State, not those of a private person.’”
“The Sixth Circuit held that an official’s activity is state action if the ‘text of state law requires an officeholder to maintain a social-media account,’ the official ‘use[s] . . . state re- sources’ or ‘government staff’ to run the account, or the ‘accoun[t] belong[s] to an office, rather than an individual officeholder.’ These situations, the Sixth Circuit explained, make an official’s social-media activity ‘fairly attributable’  to the State.&#8221;

U.S. Supreme Court

SCOTUS Warns Public Officials Not To Block Critics On Social Media

The New York Post Editorial Board published a piece Thursday laying into a recently-introduced bill that they argued would turn <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/canada" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Canada</a> into an Orwellian nightmare.
The bill in question (Bill C-63), referred to as the Online Harms Act, was first introduced by Justice Minister Arif Virani in February — and would <a href="https://nypost.com/2024/03/14/world-news/canadian-law-endorsed-by-trudeau-could-imprison-people-for-speech-crimes/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">empower the government</a> to place citizens on house arrest if social media posts provide &#8220;reasonable grounds&#8221; for officials to believe that someone &#8220;will commit&#8221; a crime.
&#8220;No, Canada!&#8221; the Post&#8217;s Editorial Board wrote in response. &#8220;The country that brought you debanking protesters and government-assisted suicide for the poor now wants to criminalize speech to lock up people for life and to put wrongthinkers under house arrest if the state sees a chance they will commit a crime. Doesn’t get more Orwellian than that.&#8221;
Minister Virani claimed that the bill was all about safety on the internet, something that he said hit close to home because he had children himself — and suggested that it would be no different than forcing toy manufacturers to abide by certain product safety regulations.
Another provision in the bill addresses &#8220;advocating for genocide&#8221; and increases the penalty for that particular infraction from five years to life in prison — and the Post noted an inherent risk in that provision as well.
&#8220;We’re sure a law that criminalizes &#8216;advocating for genocide&#8217; could never be twisted to criminalize support for Israel,&#8221; they wrote. &#8220;The pro-Hamas left will have a field day.&#8221;
The penalties for social media companies would be steep as well if they dared to refuse cooperation if the bill becomes law: fines could be upwards of a staggering 6% of global revenue.
&#8220;Handmaid&#8217;s Tale&#8221; author Margaret Atwood pointed out the dystopian future the bill was likely to help facilitate, saying via X, &#8220;If this account of the bill is true, it’s Lettres de Cachet all over again. The possibilities for revenge false accusations + thoughtcrime stuff are sooo inviting! Trudeau’s Orwellian online harms bill.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
If this account of the bill is true, it’s Lettres de Cachet all over again. The possibilities for revenge false accusations + thoughtcrime stuff are sooo inviting! Trudeau’s Orwellian online harms bill <a href="https://t.co/GziivgfNGt">https://t.co/GziivgfNGt</a>
&mdash; Margaret E Atwood (@MargaretAtwood) <a href="https://twitter.com/MargaretAtwood/status/1766323300853297262?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 9, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in Kamloops

NYPost Slams Canadian ‘Thought Crime’ Bill That Goes Full ‘Minority Report’

NYPost Slams Canadian 'Thought Crime' Bill That Goes Full 'Minority Report'

Canada

Crime

New York Post

The University of Wisconsin-Madison backed down from plans to charge a conservative group a special &#8220;security&#8221; fee for bringing Daily Wire host Michael Knowles to campus, seemingly rewarding lawless protesters with a heckler&#8217;s veto by making conservatives pay for police to stop leftists from committing crimes.
Ahead of Knowles&#8217; speech on campus Wednesday, college administrators told Young Americans for Freedom that they would have to pay $4,271.17 for six police officers, a metal detector, and other security-related costs&#8211;even charging &#8220;sales tax&#8221; despite being seemingly inapplicable. The university did not return a request for comment from The Daily Wire, but reversed its decision on Monday afternoon in the face of accusations that what it was doing was &#8220;unlawful.&#8221;
The university has not billed student groups for &#8220;security&#8221; for hosting speakers in the past, the Wisconsin Institute for Law &amp; Liberty (WILL) and the Mountain States Legal Foundation <a href="https://will-law.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/FINAL-UW-Letter-3-8-24.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a>, saying the costs are &#8220;unlawful.&#8221;
The charge was purportedly the result of a &#8220;risk assessment worksheet&#8221; that said there were &#8220;significant security/safety problems at event sponsor events (in last 2 years).&#8221;
That may be a reference to the fact that leftists <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/wisconsin-college-campus-vandalized-ahead-of-matt-walshs-speech" target="_blank" rel="noopener">committed large-scaled vandalism</a>, with profane messages spray-painted on prominent historic buildings, when YAF brought another Daily Wire host, Matt Walsh, to campus in 2022. University police have video of that occurring, yet chose &#8220;not to prosecute or otherwise punish the perpetrators, and UWPD has refused to release public records related to the incident to YAF,&#8221; the letter to Chancellor Jennifer Mnookin said.
Also contributing could be the fact that last April, pro-transgenderism protesters allegedly committed crimes including igniting an &#8220;incendiary device&#8221; to derail a speech by Knowles at the University of Pittsburgh, after plotting to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/knowles-unfazed-as-pro-trans-protesters-bid-to-disrupt-pitt-debate" target="_blank" rel="noopener">&#8220;shut it down.&#8221;</a> Two people were later charged by the federal government with conspiracy and obstruction of law enforcement. One of them, Brian DiPippa, was also charged with using an <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/two-protesters-from-michael-knowles-pitt-debate-on-transgenderism-indicted" target="_blank" rel="noopener">explosive to commit a federal felony</a>.
In other words, the university was punishing conservatives for the fact that liberals committed crimes to silence or victimize them — all while not punishing those liberal wrongdoers, the letter said, adding that such a policy encourages more left-wing crimes.
On Monday afternoon, UW backed down from the demand without conceding any mistake or pledging reforms.
&#8220;Solely to ensure that the speaker event moves forward in this tight timeframe, the contract is being revised to remove charges related to the extensive security protocols,&#8221; Nancy Lynch, UW-Madison’s vice chancellor for legal affairs, wrote.
UW did not bill YAF for security for the Walsh event or for a similar one with Daily Wire co-founder Ben Shapiro. There is no indication it has charged left-wing speakers for security, including the &#8220;controversial&#8221; Bradley Manning, a felon who stole classified documents, or Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).
&#8220;According to WILL’s own public records requests, UW-Madison did not charge controversial author Nikole Hannah-Jones (author of the historically inaccurate 1619 Project) for security in 2022—in fact, UW-Madison actually paid her $55,000,&#8221; the legal group&#8217;s letter said.
The letter from YAF&#8217;s lawyers said UW &#8220;apparently believes that Knowles’s speech presents more of a security concern exactly because of the content of his speech, and the public reaction to that speech. But a policy like UW’s is invalid if it &#8216;ties the amount of the fee to the content of the speech.'&#8221; It warned that &#8220;individual UW actors may be personally liable for their involvement in these constitutional violations.&#8221;
The University of California, Berkeley similarly tried to charge YAF for security aimed at restraining leftist would-be lawbreakers, and &#8220;ultimately settled with YAF by paying $70,000 in attorney fees and agreed to revise campus policies for hosting speakers,&#8221; the letter said.
Knowles, ironically, authored a book on censorship called <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Speechless-Controlling-Words-Minds/dp/1684510821" target="_blank" rel="noopener">&#8220;Speechless.&#8221;</a> His speech at Madison is a pro-life address called &#8220;The Case Against Murder.&#8221;
“Freedom of speech is not negotiable,&#8221; Dan Lennington, WILL Deputy Counsel said in a statement. &#8220;Charging a conservative group thousands of dollars for a so-called ‘controversial’ speaker is ridiculous, especially since UW-Madison routinely hosts—and even pays—controversial leftwing speakers. UW-Madison should be happy to support multiple viewpoints and a robust exchange of ideas.&#8221;
UW is a public institution that says it &#8220;values freedom of expression as an essential part of its educational mission&#8221; and helpfully <a href="https://free-expression.wisc.edu" target="_blank" rel="noopener">explains</a> to its students, &#8220;What is the First Amendment?&#8221;
DiPippa, the man charged with allegedly using an explosive device at Knowles&#8217; University of Pittsburgh speech, remains in jail while awaiting trial, despite a letter from a &#8220;DEI coach and consultant&#8221; named Nancy Kahn, who <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.pawd.300848/gov.uscourts.pawd.300848.54.1.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote to the judge</a> that he should be released because he is &#8220;self aware of his male privilege.&#8221;
Kahn, who told the judge her pronouns were &#8220;she/her + BIPOC,&#8221; is Managing Principal of the Across Differences Coaching Institute and Consultancy and said she worked with DiPippa at talk radio station KPFA.

Knowles protests

College Backs Down From Plan To Charge Conservatives ‘Security’ Fee To Host Michael Knowles

Daily Wire

Education

University of Wisconsin

Wisconsin

CBS News President Ingrid Ciprian-Matthews will be honored as the recipient of an upcoming industry free-speech award — just weeks after the network booted veteran reporter <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/catherine-herridge-cut-from-cbs-amid-wave-of-layoffs-at-paramount-global-report" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Catherine Herridge</a> and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/cbs-seized-confidential-files-from-fired-reporter-who-was-pursuing-hunter-biden-story-reports" target="_blank" rel="noopener">confiscated her notes</a> and research.
Ciprian-Matthews is set to receive a <a href="https://www.rtdna.org/news/rtdna-announces-first-of-the-2024-first-amendment-award-honorees" target="_blank" rel="noopener">First Amendment Award</a> from the Radio Television Digital News Association (RTDNA) on March 9, less than one month after the network fired former Fox News reporter Catherine Herridge and seized her files — a move that sent shockwaves through media outlets nationwide — and then returned the files after intense backlash.
&#8220;Can&#8217;t make this up. CBS News fires @CBS_Herridge, then steals her notes, and in disgrace is forced to return them. A week later, the president of @CBSNews who signed off on that theft receives an industry free speech award,&#8221; Media Research Center President Brent Bozell posted via X.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Can&#39;t make this up. CBS News fires <a href="https://twitter.com/CBS_Herridge?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@CBS_Herridge</a>, then steals her notes, and in disgrace is forced to return them. 
A week later, the president of <a href="https://twitter.com/CBSNews?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@CBSNews</a> who signed off on that theft receives an industry free speech award. <a href="https://t.co/km5O8sVVKd">https://t.co/km5O8sVVKd</a>
&mdash; Brent Bozell (@BrentBozell) <a href="https://twitter.com/BrentBozell/status/1762801853132054658?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 28, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The seizure of Herridge&#8217;s files — which by most accounts was unprecedented — prompted backlash and even sparked a probe led by the House Judiciary Committee. CBS insisted in a letter to the committee that the files in question belonged to the network and there was &#8220;<a href="https://nypost.com/2024/02/28/media/cbs-insists-seizure-of-catherine-herridges-files-was-nothing-unusual/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">nothing unusual</a>&#8221; about retaining them.
It wasn&#8217;t until several days had passed — and Herridge&#8217;s union SAG-AFTRA got involved — that CBS reversed position and returned some of the files.
&#8220;FILES UPDATE: CBS News returns hundreds of pages of reporting materials after @sagaftra intervened,&#8221; Herridge posted.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
<a href="https://t.co/L5l5IKrohI">pic.twitter.com/L5l5IKrohI</a>
&mdash; Catherine Herridge (@CBS_Herridge) <a href="https://twitter.com/CBS_Herridge/status/1762255233583902778?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 26, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Herridge&#8217;s exit from CBS comes amid a First Amendment case in which she was ordered by U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper to reveal a source and has refused to do so — and the case becomes even more complicated because the files CBS retained could potentially contain information such as confidential source names and contact information.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Ciprian-Matthews was also the subject of an internal probe by CBS parent company Paramount Global in 2021 after accusations of discriminatory hiring practices and claims that she intentionally &#8220;sidelined&#8221; white reporters. In one such instance, according to a <a href="https://nypost.com/2024/01/09/media/new-woke-boss-at-cbs-news-got-top-job-despite-hr-probe-sources/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">report</a> from the New York Post, Ciprian-Matthews allegedly replaced a white reporter with an African American reporter to handle coverage in the aftermath of the January 6th riot on Capitol Hill.

CBS News

CBS News Prez Will Get Free Speech Award Weeks After Confiscating Fired Reporter’s Research/Notes

CBS News Prez Will Get Free Speech Award Weeks After Confiscating Fired Reporter's Research/Notes

Media

The U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) is facing pressure from Senate Republicans after a report revealed efforts to combat alleged misinformation.
Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-MO) sent a letter to NSF Director Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan on Friday requesting a “comprehensive list of projects funded by the NSF Convergence Accelerator Track F.” Through the program, the NSF has spent tens of millions of dollars to “combat mis- and disinformation,” according to <a href="https://dailycaller.com/2023/02/19/nsf-funding-misinformation-disinformation-research-grants/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Daily Caller News Foundation</a>.
“To say that NSF’s reported involvement in funding research projects aimed at developing AI tools for identifying and combating alleged misinformation is un-American would be an understatement,” Schmitt wrote in the letter, obtained by The Daily Wire. “This seems to be yet another brazen attempt by your agency and the Biden Administration to collude with Big Tech to silence those who eschew the thoughts and ideals of the political Left.”
Schmitt’s request follows a report on the NSF program by the House Judiciary Committee.
 “The purpose of these taxpayer-funded projects is to develop artificial intelligence (AI)- powered censorship and propaganda tools that can be used by governments and Big Tech to shape public opinion by restricting certain viewpoints or promoting others,” the report said according to the <a href="https://dailycaller.com/2024/02/06/emails-show-how-biden-officials-considered-covering-up-censorship-activities-in-the-wake-of-dcnf-report/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">DCNF</a>.
The NSF has dolled out sizeable grants to top U.S. universities to track and study online discourse for examples of misinformation and disinformation. Syracuse University received nearly $500,000 to study how “misinformation becomes woven into narratives online, how technology influences this process, and how design might be used to alter it.”
Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology received $750,000 from the program. One of the researchers wrote in a project proposal summary to the NSF that “broad swaths of the public cannot effectively sort truth from fiction online.”
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1708708042546000&amp;usg=AOvVaw34eJlfGtZyH4uAJE3bvTlM">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
The NSF program has already been the <a href="https://dailycaller.com/2024/02/06/jim-jordan-subpoenas-national-science-foundation-communications-discussing-content-moderation-social-media/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">target</a> of subpoenas by Republicans in the House. 
<iframe loading="lazy" class="scribd_iframe_embed" tabindex="0" title="Senator Eric Schmitt Letter to NSF Director Panchanathan" src="https://www.scribd.com/embeds/707732169/content?start_page=1&amp;view_mode=scroll&amp;access_key=key-IRj8Rnq4aQuk3BUzLUwj" width="100%" height="600" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-auto-height="true" data-aspect-ratio="0.7729220222793488"></iframe>
“The Biden Administration has shown a stunning disregard for Americans’ freedom of speech online and has gone as far as to coerce social media companies to censor Americans online,” Schmitt told The Daily Wire in a statement. “With the rapid rise of artificial intelligence in the public and commercial sector, we have a duty to ensure AI is used responsibly and not weaponized against Americans’ constitutional rights.”

Eric Schmitt

Senate GOP Probe National Science Foundation Over ‘Brazen Attempt’ To Censor Free Speech

Censorship

Congress

Washington D.C.

Menu