The Biden administration&#8217;s former &#8220;disinformation czar,&#8221; ousted after an apparent attempt to create an Orwellian ministry of truth within the Department of Defense, has launched a new nonprofit that declares criticism of &#8220;disinformation researchers&#8221; such as herself as a chief threat to the United States of America.
&#8220;The campaign against counter-disinformation work is the greatest threat to freedom of expression and academic integrity since the McCarthy era,&#8221; Nina Jankowicz said in a press release, pledging that her group would not &#8220;allow it to continue.&#8221;
&#8220;Once researchers are free to conduct their essential work, the American people will gain a better understanding of the nature and severity of the disinformation threats we face,&#8221; she said. &#8220;Disinformation knows no political party. Its ultimate victim is our democracy.&#8221;
The group, the American Sunlight Project, was announced as a bipartisan advocacy organization founded by Jankowicz that was &#8220;launched to expose and oppose efforts to weaponize disinformation in the United States.&#8221;
&#8220;The organization will investigate the networks and money driving disinformation and educate the public about the threats disinformation poses to their daily lives,&#8221; it says. &#8220;The first step in the group’s program will involve countering the organized campaign currently challenging the work of disinformation researchers.&#8221;
The group&#8217;s advisory board consists of Katie Harbath, a former Facebook executive, Emily Horne, a former National Security Council official, Ineke Mushovic of the gay advocacy group Movement Advancement Project, and Ben Wittes of the left-wing Brookings Institution, who was once described as the &#8220;<a href="https://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/politico50/benjamin-wittes/">bard of the deep state</a>.&#8221;
Carlos Álvarez-Aranyos, the group&#8217;s co-founder, claims that &#8220;organized campaigns are preventing us from researching and understanding the threat of disinformation and organization an appropriate national response,&#8221; promising to &#8220;break the deadlocks holding us back.&#8221;
In 2022, Jankowicz was appointed by the Department of Homeland Security to lead an ill-fated body called the Disinformation Governance Board. An uproar over civil liberties ensued, including from 20 state attorneys general, with the Biden administration ultimately <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/house-republicans-demand-answers-from-nina-jankowicz-on-new-disinformation-governance-board" target="_blank" rel="noopener">scrapping</a> the idea. Jankowicz says the criticism of the board was, itself, misinformation.
Jankowicz had posted bizarre videos of herself singing about &#8220;disinformation,&#8221; referring to herself as the &#8220;Mary Poppins of disinformation.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
You can just call me the Mary Poppins of disinformation 💁🏻‍♀️ <a href="https://t.co/eGV9lpctYn">https://t.co/eGV9lpctYn</a> <a href="https://t.co/WVQFA2bPmq">pic.twitter.com/WVQFA2bPmq</a>
&mdash; Nina Jankowicz (@wiczipedia) <a href="https://twitter.com/wiczipedia/status/1362153807879303171?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 17, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Misinformation&#8221; groups often purport to rate news outlets in the name of transparency, assign failing ratings to center-right news outlets, and then refuse to share their data with journalists who want to check their methodology.
In the past, they have been subsidized by the government, and served to enforce government-sanctioned lines — such as that the coronavirus did not leak out of a Chinese lab — in the media.
Anti-&#8220;misinformation&#8221; efforts often hold only the barest pretext to being anything other than partisan enforcers, saying they aim to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/state-department-paid-germans-to-bring-censorship-and-propaganda-to-u-s-schools" target="_blank" rel="noopener">rescue</a> people from early warning signs that they believe could head down a path to extremes — which often amounts to a belief in center-right ideas — while actively advocating for left-wing falsities such as the New York Times&#8217; debunked 1619 Project.
Even as they make a living criticizing others, &#8220;misinformation researchers&#8221; have played the victim as soon as people do not react to their work the way they hoped.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/20-gop-attorneys-general-threaten-lawsuit-over-un-american-disinformation-board" target="_blank" rel="noopener">called</a> the scrapped Disinformation Governance Board an &#8220;un-American, anti-democratic, and a dangerous escalation of the Biden Administration’s embrace of government-endorsed censorship,&#8221; and said Americans should not trust Jankowicz to act &#8220;as the Biden Administration&#8217;s arbiter of truth.&#8221;
The new &#8220;sunlight&#8221; group <a href="https://www.americansunlight.org/letter-to-congress">wrote</a> to the Committee faulting it for releasing excerpts from &#8220;misinformation experts&#8221; own testimony, saying it has made them &#8220;targets for harassment.&#8221;
The group lamented that &#8220;dozens of AI-generated images of former President Trump posing with Black voters have circulated online&#8221; and said the images &#8220;are real, present-day threats to American democracy.&#8221;

Nina Jankowicz

‘Mary Poppins Of Disinformation’ Returns With New Group To Defend Disinformation Industry

Disinformation Governance Board

Social Media Censorship

After my film &#8220;<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/videos/what-is-a-woman" target="_blank" rel="noopener">What is a Woman?</a>&#8221; became one of the most-watched documentaries of all-time, there were a couple of different responses that Leftists could have had. The easiest response would have been to simply answer the question in the title. 
Trans activists, the media, and politicians had the opportunity to provide a coherent, non-circular definition for the word &#8220;woman&#8221; — and then they would have immediately won the argument. That&#8217;s all they had to do. But, of course, trans ideology can&#8217;t provide a coherent definition of the word &#8220;woman,&#8221; so they refused to do it when I interviewed several of them for the film. And they haven&#8217;t been able to do it in the nearly two years since.
Instead, as I&#8217;ve discussed before, the Left lied about the film. They accused me of &#8220;transphobia&#8221; for allowing trans activists to explain — or rather, fail to explain — what they believe. But they didn&#8217;t stop there. On top of all the lies, one of the most powerful technology platforms in the county embarked on an effort to prevent me from speaking about the film. This platform, called Eventbrite, also tried to shut down screenings of the documentary. They claimed any event screening the film, or discussing it, violated their &#8220;Hateful Events Policy.&#8221; 
If you&#8217;re not familiar with Eventbrite, it controls roughly 50% of the event management and registration market. They&#8217;re hard to avoid, even if you want to. And on at least seven occasions, they canceled events involving &#8220;<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/videos/what-is-a-woman" target="_blank" rel="noopener">What is a Woman?</a>&#8220;, often costing event organizers like YAF thousands of dollars.
At the time, it seemed like just another example of a Left-wing company silencing political dissent. Stop me if you&#8217;ve heard that one before.
But the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation decided to look deeper into what&#8217;s going on. Under the leadership of ranking member Ted Cruz (R-TX), the committee launched a congressional investigation into several instances in which online service providers canceled services for conservative organizations and speakers. The committee probed Eventbrite, and many other companies like it, to understand what was going on internally at these companies when they made these decisions to censor conservatives. And today, we can bring you the results of that investigation, exclusively.
Here&#8217;s the topline finding from their report, which outlines the Left&#8217;s strategy for attacking the freedom of speech and association: 
<blockquote>This investigation revealed that Online Service Providers are following a new playbook for silencing conservatives that leftist organizations — including the notoriously biased Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and Anti-Defamation League (ADL)—concocted: &#8216;removing infrastructure services&#8217; that conservative organizations &#8216;need to operate&#8217; by weaponizing their terms of service.</blockquote>
In other words, what Eventbrite did to &#8220;What is a Woman?&#8221; is part of a much larger effort to deplatform anyone who disagrees with the Left, particularly on the issue of transgenderism. This is their answer to me — as well as to Libs of TikTok, swimmer Riley Gaines, and nonprofits like the Independent Women&#8217;s Forum. They can&#8217;t debate us. They have to shut us down and prevent us from speaking.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1353-the-matt-walsh-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h4>
The committee&#8217;s investigation exposes this effort, in great detail, for the total fraud that it is. Publicly, companies like Eventbrite will claim that they&#8217;re combating &#8220;hate&#8221; and &#8220;disinformation&#8221; when they shut down events featuring my film, for example. But in reality, the committee found, no one at Eventbrite even watched &#8220;What is a Woman?&#8221; before they decided to ban all events themed around the film.
As the report states: 
<blockquote>Eventbrite admitted to the Committee that no one involved in the decision watched What Is a Woman? film before cancelling the events. Eventbrite could not even identify a single timestamp in the trailer that it deemed to violate the Eventbrite Community Guidelines. According to Eventbrite: &#8216;[t]he overall tone and message of the all-encompassing trailer, in combination with Matt Walsh’s related public statements, helped determine the removals—not any individual timestamp.&#8217;</blockquote>
To restate, because this really is incredible: A Big Tech platform banned events involving my film, saying these events violated their &#8220;hateful events policy,&#8221; without even watching the film.
According to the committee, Eventbrite has a “Trust and Safety Team” that consists of at least 12 full-time employees who review every single case. Eventbrite describes these employees as &#8220;experts.&#8221; Experts in what? What are their qualifications? That’s never explained. But they certainly aren’t experts in the film because none of these &#8220;experts&#8221; saw the film that they wanted to ban. Instead, they looked at non-specific parts of the trailer, and my public statements. 
So let&#8217;s review. Here&#8217;s the first 45 seconds or so of the trailer for &#8220;What is a Woman?&#8221;, which is probably more than Eventbrite&#8217;s experts watched:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="001 WIAW Trailer" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5FH0NaDVThw?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
That is the alleged &#8220;hateful content&#8221; that, apparently, Eventbrite finds disqualifying. No one can use Eventbrite to show the film or even discuss it. It&#8217;s not exactly convincing. So, maybe to cover their bases, Eventbrite told the committee that they banned my events for a few other reasons. Specifically, they said my public statements were hateful.
What public statements, exactly? Eventbrite provided three examples — all of them are from before the film was released. 
The first example is my appearance on a Dr. Phil episode entitled &#8220;The Gender Pronoun Debate,&#8221; from January 19, 2022. The whole episode runs for the better part of an hour, and again, there&#8217;s basically no chance that Eventbrite&#8217;s experts watched it. But here&#8217;s a representative part:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="002 Dr Phil What Is A Woman" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/v5it2lACi60?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
According to Eventbrite, the fact that I used the words &#8220;mental illness,&#8221; &#8220;charade,&#8221; and &#8220;theatrical production&#8221; to describe men who pretend to be women, and vice versa, is evidence that I&#8217;m a very hateful person, and I shouldn&#8217;t be allowed to host events.
Additionally, Eventbrite says that in a May 2021 episode of this show, I discussed gender surgeries being performed on children — including double mastectomies — as morally akin to rape and child molestation. Apparently, that&#8217;s hateful. If you have a problem with child butchery, then Eventbrite won&#8217;t allow you to have a platform. They’re right, by the way. It is hateful. I do hate this kind of abuse against children.
There was one other objection that Eventbrite made, concerning the children&#8217;s book I wrote called &#8220;<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Johnny-Walrus-Matt-Walsh/dp/1956007059" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Johnny The Walrus</a>.&#8221; Of course, they didn&#8217;t actually read this book, anymore than they watched my film. I can’t blame them though. The book is probably above their reading level. But it was featured at the beginning of my appearance on the Dr. Phil show, which is how I assume they heard about it. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="003 Johnny The Walrus" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_0cGSzj-R7o?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
So the book, as you probably know, is about a little boy who pretends to be a walrus. People encourage him to start changing his appearance and getting surgery to transform into a walrus. And the book takes the position that this is a bad idea. It teaches that human children should recognize that they are human children, not walruses. But to Eventbrite, this is apparently a problem. They told the committee that it&#8217;s hate, so it’s bad.
The funny thing is that, as the committee&#8217;s investigation makes clear, Eventbrite doesn&#8217;t really know what their hateful conduct policy even says. Either that or they lied to the committee. 
As the report reads: 
<blockquote>On February 27—days before the March 1 event—Eventbrite removed the event’s page from its website and notified the organizer that it had done so because the event violated the Eventbrite Community Guidelines. Eventbrite told the Committee that it sends a standard notification when removing an event for violating its Hateful Events Policy. As reflected in the figure below, however, in the version Eventbrite sent to the organizers of the Stanford event, Eventbrite directly stated that the problem with the Matt Walsh event was that it &#8216;expresse[d] views&#8217; that violated the Eventbrite Terms of Service.</blockquote>
In other words, Eventbrite&#8217;s standard &#8220;Hateful Events Policy&#8221; doesn&#8217;t say anything about prohibiting certain views. They wrote up a custom notification just for one of my events, and then apparently forgot about it. This kind of ad hoc reasoning is extremely common on the Left and particularly among online service providers. It&#8217;s yet another symptom of an ideology without any real principles.
As I alluded to earlier, of course, this isn&#8217;t just affecting me. The committee outlines numerous other instances of online platforms shutting down events for conservatives, including a November 2023 event featuring the swimmer Riley Gaines at UC Davis. 
The school&#8217;s College Republicans worked with Eventbrite to set up a registration page so that students could sign up and attend for free. But in late November, Eventbrite canceled the whole thing. They notified the organizers that events cannot espouse hatred or harass anyone based on a series of characteristics, including sexual orientation, national origin, immigration status, gender identity, religion, ethnicity, or disability. Notably, Eventbrite doesn&#8217;t prohibit hatred based on &#8220;sex discrimination,&#8221; so it&#8217;s okay to deride women and pretend they don&#8217;t exist. Trans activists are free to do that all they want.
But Riley Gaines was shut down — not because of anything on her event page, but because she previously made social media posts affirming that biology is real. One of the posts cited by Eventbrite is an October 10, 2023, post from Gaines, in which she says:
<blockquote>Women are not menstruators, bleeders, chestfeeders, cervix-havers, uterus-owners, egg-producers, or people with birthing capacity. Women are just women. Adult human females.</blockquote>
According to Eventbrite, which apparently makes up its standards as it goes, that&#8217;s hateful conduct.
Along those lines, the committee investigated the communications platform Slack for canceling the workspace of Libs of TikTok. Slack informed the committee: 
<blockquote>[w]hat makes [Libs of TikTok] problematic is that Libs of TikTok has a specific audience, and they are taking this information and posting it to that specific audience so that everyone in that audience sees it at the same time.</blockquote>
Now, I&#8217;ve read that explanation about five times, and it still doesn&#8217;t make any sense. But as best I can tell, they&#8217;re admitting that nothing Libs of TikTok said was objectionable. And really, it couldn&#8217;t be; she&#8217;s just reposting deranged content from Leftists. So instead of making any factual argument, Slack apparently complains that a lot of people are seeing the factual information provided by Libs of TikTok, and they&#8217;re becoming hateful as a result. Somehow this alleged audience reaction makes Libs of TikTok&#8217;s conduct a violation of Slack&#8217;s policies against &#8220;inciting hatred.&#8221;
She didn&#8217;t direct anyone to engage in any hateful conduct. She simply posted the truth about what&#8217;s happening. And that&#8217;s not allowed anymore.
This is a standard that obviously, if the Left were to employ against itself, would result in the immediate deplatforming of the Washington Post, pretty much every trans activist who&#8217;s ever used social media, the entirety of CNN and MSNBC and the rest of the legacy media. But it&#8217;s not a real standard and it&#8217;s not meant to be administered fairly. Instead, as the committee notes, this standard was essentially invented by the ADL, the SPLC, and other well-funded Left-wing activist groups. 
<blockquote>Although Slack did not specifically point to them with regard to its Libs of TikTok investigation, notably, the left-wing SPLC has described Libs of TikTok as an &#8216;extremist&#8217; account and ADL labeled Libs of TikTok/Chaya Raichik as an &#8216;extremist&#8217; in its &#8216;Glossary of Extremism.&#8217;</blockquote>
The same designation applies to me. Quoting again from the report: 
<blockquote>Eventbrite did not say that it relied on ADL in deciding to cancel the What Is a Woman? events, but notably ADL—which Eventbrite’s Trust and Safety Team generally relies on as a source—has labeled Matt Walsh as an &#8216;extremist commentator.&#8217;</blockquote>
This is the strategy that&#8217;s been unearthed by this congressional committee. Motivated in part by guidance from Left-wing activist groups, large online tech platforms are doing everything they can to make sure conservatives can&#8217;t communicate or stay in business. There are several other examples. For instance, the report says that the Independent Women&#8217;s Forum, or IWF, was kicked off the fundraising platform Bonterra for defending women’s rights. Bonterra categorized IWF as some sort of &#8220;anti-LGBT&#8221; outfit, whatever that means, all because they believe biology is real. Therefore, they&#8217;re not allowed to raise money, I guess.
In its report, the committee suggests that this situation could be resolved by legislation — or at least, addressed in some way by legislation. But the ideal resolution, as the committee suggests in its conclusion, is for new online service providers to flood the market and offer an alternative. That is the only response to this insanity that&#8217;s sustainable — and it&#8217;s a very workable solution.
Because of this committee&#8217;s investigation, we know that the companies censoring conservatives are really staffed with complete, bumbling morons who have no idea what they&#8217;re doing. That means they&#8217;re powerful, yes, but they&#8217;re also vulnerable. Now it&#8217;s time to replace them before they silence us.

Matt Walsh

Insider Investigation Reveals The Absurd Details Behind Eventbrite’s Decision To Ban Me From Its Platform

Insider Investigation Reveals The Absurd Details Behind Eventbrite's Decision To Ban Me From Its Platform

Big Tech

Opinion

Readers Pass

Riley Gaines

What Is A Woman

Dozens of major brands said they could not advertise on X because of a poor rating from a third-party “brand safety” firm that now admits it made a mistake, the social media platform says.
DoubleVerify, a firm that rates digital platforms such as X based on how they handle questionable content like racism or “misinformation,” acknowledged it made a mistake with its rating of billionaire Elon Musk&#8217;s social media platform.
“DoubleVerify recently discovered a graphical error in the display of X’s Brand Safety Rate in DV’s Pinnacle dashboard that resulted in displaying an incorrect, lower rate,&#8221; CEO Mark Zegorski <a href="https://variety.com/2024/digital/news/x-twitter-brand-saftey-rate-doubleverify-apology-1235971603/">said</a>. &#8220;This display error occurred over four and a half months.”
“Based on DoubleVerify’s metrics, X’s Brand Safety Rate across all campaigns we measured exceeded 99.99%,” he wrote. “We take full responsibility” and “apologize for any conclusion.”
Joe Benarroch, X&#8217;s head of business operations, told The Daily Wire that the misrepresentation “has caused incalculable damage to our business.”  
He says companies including Campbell’s and ConAgra were hesitant to advertise on X after the DoubleVerify dashboard displayed a poor rating for a Molson Coors X campaign. All three companies use subsidiaries of the <a href="https://www.publicisgroupe.com/en/news/press-releases/publicis-media-launches-once-and-for-all-coalition-to-build-more-equitable-ad-ecosystem" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Publicis Media</a>, which says it wants to “build [a] more equitable ad ecosystem,” as their ad-buying firm. 
Campbell’s spokesman James F. Regan denied that story, saying the brands have not advertised on X since 2020 and “the decision was tied to consumer behavior and performance.” ConAgra and Molson Coors did not return requests for comment.
Benarroch said that there were “dozens” of companies “who used [DoubleVerify] to justify stopping advertising.” He said that advertisers did business with X freely when it was known as Twitter and run by a politically liberal CEO, but cited “brand safety” to stop advertising since the acquisition by Elon Musk, even though “prior to acquisition, there was little to no brand safety capabilities,” and “90% of all brand safety capabilities and partnerships were put in place post-acquisition.”
DoubleVerify is a publicly traded company that pulls in massive sums, reporting <a href="https://d1io3yog0oux5.cloudfront.net/_b14b6f43ac9e1e57c442f6bd5b46468b/doubleverify/news/2024-02-28_DoubleVerify_Reports_Fourth_Quarter_and_Full_Year__281.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">half a billion dollars</a> in revenue in 2023. The demand for its services was partly created by the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), which says that no company should advertise on news sources that promote “misinformation.&#8221; 
To determine which outlets are unacceptable, advertisers defer to third-party firms. Critics say those firms act as partisan activist groups that gin up business with the implied threat that companies could face boycotts from the Left if they advertise on channels such as Fox News. The firms have rated mainstream, center-right news outlets like Reason Magazine and the New York Post as unsuitable to advertise on, and advocates have spoken of the ratings systems as a way to bankrupt disfavored news organizations.
In 2020, DoubleVerify <a href="https://doubleverify.com/newsroom/doubleverify-announces-next-evolution-of-brand-safety-suitability-brand-suitability-tiers/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> it was “the first verification company to align product functionality with the Brand Safety Floor and Brand Suitability Framework advanced by the 4A’s Advertising Protection Bureau (APB) and World Federation of Advertisers (WFA) Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM). “
DoubleVerify openly displays its political sensibilities. The company says it is <a href="https://doubleverify.com/deib/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">focused</a> on “Breaking the Bias in Ad Tech” and “Bringing Pronouns to the Workplace,” and hosted a “Social Justice Hackathon.”
DoubleVerify did not immediately return a request for comment on how its error affected only X, and why users should trust a “misinformation” rating system that pushed misinformation. 
The House Judiciary Committee is investigating whether GARM <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/congress-calls-in-head-of-advertisers-alleged-censorship-operation-using-antitrust-laws-to-target-woke-collusion" target="_blank" rel="noopener">violated anti-trust laws</a>, and said it has seen evidence that, though the group purported to be focused on “safety” and “misinformation,” it actually targeted news outlets based on their politics, including The Daily Wire, Fox News, and Breitbart. 
It has demanded evidence from companies that compose the GARM “steering committee,”  Unilever, Procter &amp; Gamble, GroupM, Diageo, and Mars.

Elon Musk

X Says It Lost Advertisers After ‘Anti-Misinformation’ Firm Peddled Misinformation

Former Vice President Al Gore called for a ban on <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/social-media" target="_blank" rel="noopener">social media</a> algorithms, which he argued were the &#8220;digital equivalent of AR-15s.&#8221;
Gore was speaking at the United Nations Climate Conference (COP28) when he made the comments, saying that the algorithms were designed to lead readers down obscure &#8220;rabbit holes,&#8221; and as such, posed a danger to those who used the platforms.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
&quot;These algorithms, they are the digital equivalent of AR-15s, they ought to be banned&quot;
Former US Vice President Al Gore talks about the &quot;artificial insanity&quot; found in social media echo chambers<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/COP28?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#COP28</a> latest: <a href="https://t.co/kV8YawB3sH">https://t.co/kV8YawB3sH</a> <a href="https://t.co/6RqQxQWnos">pic.twitter.com/6RqQxQWnos</a>
&mdash; Bloomberg (@business) <a href="https://twitter.com/business/status/1731992979575890410?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 5, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Gore compared the so-called &#8220;rabbit holes&#8221; to carnivorous pitcher plants that lure prey to come inside — and once inside, they can&#8217;t get back out.
&#8220;If you have social media that is dominated by algorithms that pull people down these rabbit holes that are a bit like pitcher plants,&#8221; Gore began. &#8220;These algorithms, they are the digital equivalent of AR-15s, they ought to be banned – they really ought to be banned.&#8221;
&#8220;It&#8217;s an abuse of the public forum,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;But when these — when people are pulled down these rabbit holes — you know what&#8217;s at the bottom of the rabbit hole, that&#8217;s where the echo chamber is. And if you spend too much time in the echo chamber, what&#8217;s weaponized is another form of AI – not artificial intelligence, artificial insanity.&#8221;
The audience laughed at that, but Gore continued: &#8220;I&#8217;m serious! I&#8217;m serious!&#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>
&#8220;QAnon is just the best-known version of artificial insanity,&#8221; Gore said. &#8220;These devices are the enemies of self-government, and they&#8217;re the enemies of democracy. We need reforms for both democracy and capitalism.&#8221;
&#8220;Al Gore says social media algorithms are like &#8216;digital AR-15s.&#8217; To globalist elites, free speech is a dangerous weapon that must be seized. They want you to listen to their propaganda &amp; obey accordingly. The good news is you can hear the fear in his voice. They know we’re waking up,&#8221; @DC_Draino posted.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Al Gore says social media algorithms are like “digital AR-15s”😂
To globalist elites, free speech is a dangerous weapon that must be seized
They want you to listen to their propaganda &amp; obey accordingly
The good news is you can hear the fear in his voice
They know we’re… <a href="https://t.co/vjxRQoWwII">pic.twitter.com/vjxRQoWwII</a>
&mdash; DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) <a href="https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1732088516975190196?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 5, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;It’s funny that Al Gore says social media algorithms are the &#8216;digital equivalent of AR-15s,&#8217; when Conservatives were the ones being silenced online throughout the pandemic,&#8221; Judge Jeanine Pirro added. &#8220;And @AlGore in case you didn’t know — AR-15s are also protected by the second amendment, genius …&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
<a href="https://t.co/KR9DtUMd11">https://t.co/KR9DtUMd11</a>
It’s funny that Al Gore says social media algorithms are the “digital equivalent of AR-15s”, when Conservatives were the ones being silenced online throughout the pandemic… And <a href="https://twitter.com/algore?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AlGore</a> in case you didn’t know — AR-15s are also protected by the second…
&mdash; Jeanine Pirro (@JudgeJeanine) <a href="https://twitter.com/JudgeJeanine/status/1732451678341812356?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 6, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

‘An Inconvenient Sequel: Power To Truth’ – UK Premiere – VIP Arrivals

‘The Digital Equivalent Of AR-15s’: Al Gore Wants To Ban Social Media Algorithms

'The Digital Equivalent Of AR-15s': Al Gore Wants To Ban Social Media Algorithms

Al Gore

algorithm

Social Media

Social Media Bias

U.S.

A witness testifying before <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/congress" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Congress</a> on Thursday accused a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/house-democrats" target="_blank" rel="noopener">House Democrat</a> of &#8220;engaging in a conspiracy theory&#8221; about the abandoned laptop believed to have belonged to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/hunter-biden" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Hunter Biden</a>.
The witness, journalist and author Michael Shellenberger, called out Rep. <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/reporter-calls-out-rep-dan-goldman-over-archer-testimony-claim" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Dan Goldman</a> (D-NY) during a Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/committee-activity/hearings/hearing-weaponization-federal-government-4" target="_blank" rel="noopener">hearing</a> on social media censorship while they discussed the New York Post <a href="https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden-introduced-ukrainian-biz-man-to-dad/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">breaking the Hunter Biden laptop story</a> in the weeks before the 2020 election based on emails from a copy of a hard drive.
&#8220;You are aware of the &#8216;laptop&#8217;, so to speak &#8230; that was published in the New York Post was actually a hard drive that the New York Post admitted here was not authenticated as real. It was not the laptop the FBI had,&#8221; Goldman said, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEZFgh3sYTs" target="_blank" rel="noopener">referring to his exchange</a> with former New York Post reporter Emma-Jo Morris earlier this year. &#8220;You&#8217;re aware of that, right?&#8221; he added.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Rep. <a href="https://twitter.com/danielsgoldman?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@danielsgoldman</a> on Hunter&#39;s laptop: Hard drives can be manipulated by Rudy Giuliani, or Russia&quot; <a href="https://t.co/vkWuwoSJLR">pic.twitter.com/vkWuwoSJLR</a>
&mdash; Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) <a href="https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1730279391878361264?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 30, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;It was the same contents,&#8221; Shellenberger replied.
&#8220;How do you know?&#8221; Goldman asked. &#8220;You would have to authenticate it to know it was the same contents. You have no idea. You know hard drives can be manipulated,&#8221; he added before Shellenberger could complete an answer.
&#8220;Are you suggesting the New York Post participated in a conspiracy to construct the contents of the Hunter biden laptop?&#8221; Shellenberger shot back.
&#8220;No, sir. Hard drives can be manipulated by Rudy Giuliani, or Russia,&#8221; Goldman said, referring to the former New York City mayor who had been working as a personal lawyer for former President Donald Trump at the time of the laptop fiasco. When Shellenberger asked what evidence there was of manipulation, Goldman contended, &#8220;Well, there is actual evidence of it, but the point is it&#8217;s not the same thing.&#8221;
Shellenberger retorted, &#8220;There&#8217;s no evidence for it, so you&#8217;re engaging in a conspiracy theory.&#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>
Biden <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/546148-hunter-biden-doesnt-know-if-delaware-laptop-was-his/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">has said in the past</a> that he did not know whether he was the owner of the laptop abandoned at a Delaware repair shop before it was seized by the FBI. His legal team has <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hunter-biden-denver-riggleman-former-gop-congressman-jan-6-select-committee-adviser/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reportedly been</a> looking for possible distorted or fabricated data linked to the first son and they recently <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2023/09/26/hunter-biden-sues-rudy-giuliani-over-infamous-laptop.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">sued</a> Giuliani over the laptop. Yet over the past few years, many of the laptop&#8217;s contents — revealing details about Biden&#8217;s personal life and work — <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/fbi-allegedly-informed-twitter-the-hunter-biden-laptop-was-real-on-key-date" target="_blank" rel="noopener">have been</a> analyzed and <a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/30/hunter-biden-laptop-data-examined/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/30/hunter-biden-laptop-data-examined/" data-sk="tooltip_parent" data-remove-tab-index="true">shown to be authentic</a>.
In the hours that followed publication of the New York Post&#8217;s <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-cybersecurity-expert-authenticates-new-york-posts-smoking-gun-hunter-biden-email-report-says" target="_blank" rel="noopener">&#8220;smoking-gun&#8221; email story</a>, Twitter temporarily blocked the <a href="https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden-introduced-ukrainian-biz-man-to-dad/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">report</a> with details of Biden&#8217;s shady business dealings and his father&#8217;s possible ties to them from being shared, claiming the story violated its rule against sharing &#8220;hacked&#8221; materials. Facebook also took steps to limit the spread of the story, which came just weeks before Hunter&#8217;s father, Joe Biden, was elected president of the United States.
Around this time, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/active-cia-employee-asked-intel-veteran-if-he-would-sign-hunter-biden-letter-report" target="_blank" rel="noopener">51 former intelligence officials signed a letter</a> that suggested the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/hunter-biden" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Hunter Biden</a> laptop story had the &#8220;classic earmarks&#8221; of a Russian disinformation operation. A firestorm ensued when POLITICO <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276" target="_blank" rel="noopener">published a headline</a> that said the former intelligence officials were claiming the laptop story was “Russian disinfo&#8221; and then the elder Biden <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/house-gop-demand-records-from-ex-intel-officials-about-hunter-biden-laptop-letter" target="_blank" rel="noopener">used</a> the letter to cast doubt on it during a debate against Trump.
While Democrats in Congress downplayed the social media clampdown on the story, Republicans raised concerns about there being a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/jim-jordan-subpoenas-big-tech-executives-in-collusion-investigation" target="_blank" rel="noopener">coordinated effort</a> involving Big Tech and government agents to suppress damaging information about the Bidens in the run-up to the 2020 election — including when it <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/2023-07-20-jdj-to-wray-re-dehmlow-testimony.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">came to the laptop</a>. People who worked as executives at <a href="https://6abc.com/former-twitter-execs-say-removal-of-hunter-biden-laptop-story-was-a/12790381/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Twitter</a>, which as since been rebranded to X, and <a href="https://nypost.com/2022/08/25/mark-zuckerberg-criticizes-twitters-handling-of-the-posts-hunter-biden-laptop-story/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Facebook</a> later conceded that cracking down on the story was a mistake.
Hunter Biden is now facing federal gun charges, to which he has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hunter-biden-pleads-not-guilty-to-gun-charges" target="_blank" rel="noopener">pleaded not guilty</a>, and tax counts may soon follow. House Republicans are looking into the Department of Justice&#8217;s handling of the criminal probe into Hunter Biden as part of an <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/house-republicans-unveil-biden-impeachment-inquiry-website" target="_blank" rel="noopener">impeachment</a> inquiry against President Biden.

Representative Dan Goldman

Journalist Calls Out Democrat Over Hunter Biden Laptop ‘Conspiracy Theory’ During Hearing

Journalist Calls Out Democrat Over Hunter Biden Laptop 'Conspiracy Theory' During Hearing

Censorship

Congress

Hunter Biden

U.S. House of Representatives

Elon Musk’s X-Corp asked a California court on Friday to overturn a first-of-its-kind online content moderation law, arguing the measure pressures social media platforms to censor discourse viewed as problematic by state officials.
X, formerly known as Twitter, filed a <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.caed.433955/gov.uscourts.caed.433955.1.0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">lawsuit</a> in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California against the new law AB 587, which requires social media companies to publicly disclose moderation practices around categories the state could label as misinformation/disinformation, extremism/radicalization, and hate speech — otherwise the state could impose fines for non-compliance.
But with Musk’s pledge to restore a marketplace of ideas on his newly rebranded $44 billion social media company, X Corp. alleges California’s new law regulating certain forms of speech violates the First Amendment under the U.S. and California constitutions.
“Because X Corp. must take such positions on these topics as they are formulated by the State, X Corp. is being forced to adopt the State’s politically-charged terms, which is a form of compelled speech in and of itself,” the lawsuit alleges.
“AB 587 thus mandates X Corp. to speak about sensitive, controversial topics about which it does not wish to speak in the hopes of pressuring X Corp. to limit constitutionally-protected content on its platform that the state apparently finds objectionable or undesirable,” the suit says.
Lawmakers tout the content moderation practice as a mere “transparency measure” under which state officials require certain social media companies to make their content moderation policies and statistics publicly available.
Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel (D-Encino), who authored the bill, said in <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2023/09/08/twitter-x-elon-musk-california-moderation-transparency-law-as-unconstitutional-ab-587/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">response</a> to the lawsuit that AB 587 is “a pure transparency measure that simply requires companies to be upfront about if and how they are moderating content.”
“It in no way requires any specific content moderation policies,” he added. “If Twitter has nothing to hide, then they should have no objection to this bill.”
The lawsuit brought forward by X Corp. comes months after satire news website Babylon Bee <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/babylon-bee-ceo-tim-pool-file-lawsuit-against-california-attorney-general-over-new-social-media-law" target="_blank" rel="noopener">filed separate litigation</a> with podcaster Tim Pool and Minds, Inc. against California’s attorney general to keep state officials from enforcing the content moderation law.
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://onelink.to/dwapp" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-57741">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
The group argues the law was “written with the express intent to discourage expression” of constitutionally protected viewpoints and failed the vagueness doctrine of the Fourteenth Amendment, which requires criminal laws to state explicitly and definitely what conduct is punishable.
“If Big Tech is tasked by the state with eliminating hateful or misinformative content, they’ll stuff everything they don’t like into those categories, including opinions, jokes, and even factual statements,” Babylon Bee CEO Seth Dillon said. “We’ve already experienced it first hand.”
Upon signing the bill into law, which is set to take effect next year, California Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom said the state would “not stand by as social media is weaponized to spread hate and disinformation that threaten our communities and foundational values as a country.”
Dillon argued that lawmakers made the law too vague and called it a censorship bill.
“We need laws that prohibit viewpoint discrimination, not laws that compel it under threat of penalties (and under the guise of good-faith content moderation),” Dillon said.

US-TECHNOLOGY-TWITTER-MUSK-X

Elon Musk’s X Corp Sues California Over Social Media Content Moderation Law

Elon Musk's X Corp Sues California Over Social Media Content Moderation Law

Babylon Bee

California

Courts

Gavin Newsom

Tim Pool

Twitter

A federal appeals court has ruled that the Biden administration cannot coerce or “significantly encourage” social media companies to censor content, saying that previous actions of the administration had violated the First Amendment. 
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/0f6d7356-f470-4eb0-9609-fc4e34b47e5b.pdf?itid=lk_interstitial_manual_10" target="_blank" rel="noopener">partially upheld</a> a lower court&#8217;s ruling in Missouri vs. Biden barring the FBI, the Centers for Disease Control, the White House, and the surgeon general from being able to pressure social media companies to take down or limit the scope of content the administration didn’t like. The court specifically ruled against a number of officials, including White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and Surgeon General Vivek Murthy.
&#8220;Defendants, and their employees and agents, shall take no actions, formal or informal, directly or indirectly, to coerce or significantly encourage social-media companies to remove, delete, suppress, or reduce, including through altering their algorithms, posted social-media content containing protected free speech,&#8221; the decision <a href="https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/appeals-court-upholds-decision-barring-biden-admin-colluding-big-tech-censor?utm_source=daily&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=newsletter" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a>. &#8220;That includes, but is not limited to, compelling the platforms to act, such as by intimating that some form of punishment will follow a failure to comply with any request, or supervising, directing, or otherwise meaningfully controlling the social-media companies&#8217; decision-making process.&#8221;
Documents released by Congress last month <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-admin-pressured-fb-to-suppress-daily-wire-content-push-users-to-legacy-outlets-newly-released-docs" target="_blank" rel="noopener">show</a> that a White House official asked Facebook to promote legacy outlets and stifle The Daily Wire’s reach in order to accomplish the administration’s directives on suppressing content that clashed with its COVID vaccine agenda. 
The ruling from the appeals court was <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/09/08/5th-circuit-ruling-covid-content-moderation/">not as expansive</a> as the original ruling against the Biden administration from U.S. Judge Terry A. Doughty. Injunctions against the HHS, the Census Bureau, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency were not upheld. 
“If you were to change the algorithm so that people were more likely to see NYT, WSJ, any authoritative news source over Daily Wire, Tomi Lahren, polarizing people. You wouldn’t have a mechanism to check the material impact?” then White House Digital Director Rob Flaherty said in a meeting with Facebook in 2021. Flaherty was named as one of the defendants in the case who the injunction applied to.
The decision against the Biden administration, which was first sued by several states including Louisiana and Missouri. The states said in the lawsuit that the Biden administration’s actions were “the most egregious violations of the First Amendment in the history of the United States of America.”
<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=1693504018745000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1RMMjCvCBOBYdpkw5O_njE">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
The decision  was celebrated by Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey. “The First Amendment remains intact,” he <a href="https://twitter.com/AGAndrewBailey/status/1700271862415282448?s=20">posted</a> on X. “The first brick was laid in the wall of separation between tech and state on July 4th, and this ruling is yet another brick.”
Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry said the decision was “a major win against censorship, totalitarianism, and Biden.”

Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre Holds Daily White House Media Briefing

Appeals Court Rules Biden Officials Violated First Amendment In Social Media Censorship Case

Biden Administration

First Amendment

Politics

YouTube on Friday reversed course and halted its limited monetization enforcement of Daily Wire Editor Emeritus Ben Shapiro&#8217;s first episode of his new series, &#8220;Facts,&#8221; which takes on the powerful entities trying to censor so-called “misinformation” and dictate what media is “safe” for advertising.
The reversal came after Media Research Center (MRC) Free Speech America <a href="https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/free-speech/luis-cornelio/2023/08/11/youtube-wont-admit-it-demonetized-ben-shapiro-bombshell">pressed</a> YouTube about why monetization of Shapiro’s video was suppressed. MRC said YouTube effectively refused to acknowledge that the platform had limited the video in the first place. Notably, The Daily Wire was in communication with YouTube when the media company twice appealed YouTube’s suppression of the limited monetization and a manual review upheld the suppression, suggesting YouTube’s demonetization was intentional and not in error. 
“In order for a video to monetize on YouTube it must comply with our<a href="https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6162278?hl=en#zippy="> advertiser-friendly guidelines</a>, which are publicly accessible and apply to all creators,” a YouTube spokesperson told MRC. “Upon review, the video in question is currently monetizing.”
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ana-kasparian-lauds-shapiros-fairness-after-being-mocked-again-for-speaking-with-him">Shapiro</a> announced on Thursday that YouTube suppressed monetization of the “Facts” video, which was first released on July 29. 
&#8220;Ironically, YouTube has suppressed monetization for Episode 1 of my new YouTube series, Facts, because it &#8216;discusses New World Order, which is a non-monetizable &#8220;conspiracy theory&#8221;&#8216; under [YouTube’s] Dangerous Acts in ad-friendly guidelines,'&#8221; Shapiro posted to X, formerly known as Twitter. 
&#8220;Except nothing in the video is a conspiracy theory at all,&#8221; he wrote. &#8220;Watch for yourself and get the facts about who is controlling ad revenue on YouTube and all of the largest Big Tech platforms&#8211;including this one.&#8221;
In the episode, Shapiro <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ben-shapiro-takes-on-corporations-behind-censorship">explains</a> how the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA), which <a href="https://wfanet.org/knowledge/item/2017/01/30/Agency-Trading-Desks-still-dominate-programmatic-but-advertisers-are-demanding-a-new-more-transparent-relationship">represents</a> 90% of “global marketing communications,” and the World Economic Forum are behind a large-scale effort to influence how advertisers spend their money.
“There’s a group of people who control what you are allowed to see, the news you read, the videos you watch, the posts you engage with,&#8221; he said. &#8220;You haven’t heard of them. You don’t know their names, but they determine through methods, both direct and indirect, whether you are allowed to be exposed to particular messages. Their decisions can bankrupt companies, silence voices, and fundamentally shift cultural norms.&#8221;
Notably, Shapiro even remarks during the episode that the video could be censored based on the ambiguous and clearly biased framework entities like GARM and NewsGuard operate under.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Ironically, YouTube has suppressed monetization for Episode 1 of my new YouTube series, Facts, because it “discusses New World Order, which is a non-monetizable ‘conspiracy theory’ under [YouTube’s] Dangerous Acts in ad-friendly guidelines.” 
Except nothing in the video is a… <a href="https://t.co/rPj5d1JhA2">pic.twitter.com/rPj5d1JhA2</a>
&mdash; Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1689668037719261185?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 10, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Shapiro’s announcement about the suppressed monetization and the subject matter of his “Facts” episode gained much attention online, including from Tesla and X owner Elon Musk, the world’s second richest man. 
“I think the solution here is to price so-called ‘safe’ advertising higher than ‘unsafe,’” Musk responded to Shapiro on Friday. “My companies will happily buy the latter.” 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I think the solution here is to price so-called “safe” advertising higher than “unsafe”. 
My companies will happily buy the latter.
&mdash; Elon Musk (@elonmusk) <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1689938510935887872?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 11, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
Shapiro countered Musk’s take, stating, “‘Safe’ and ‘unsafe’ are dog whistles designed to enable censorship and demonetize ‘wrongthink.’”
“GARM has subjective guidelines for what it considers ‘safe’ for advertising, and its corporate partners seem to be interpreting these convoluted rules to fit a narrative,” he explained. 
The host added a screenshot of GARM’s “Brand Safety Floor,” outlining the content the group deems “not appropriate for any advertising support.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
2/ GARM has subjective guidelines for what it considers “safe” for advertising, and its corporate partners seem to be interpreting these convoluted rules to fit a narrative. Here&#39;s their “Brand Safety Floor” &#8211; “content not appropriate for any advertising support.” <a href="https://t.co/bfhEvwWSFE">pic.twitter.com/bfhEvwWSFE</a>
&mdash; Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1690132296332955648?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 11, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“How are [L&#8217;Oréal Groupe] (Garnier) &amp; Mastercard’s sponsorships of bondage &amp; strippers at this NYC Pride Parade not ‘Adult &amp; Explicit Sexual Content,’ and a ‘Sensitive Social Issue?’ Is this ‘safe?’” Shapiro posed. 
The author noted that GARM member TikTok sponsored the 2022 LA Pride Parade, “where a half naked bondage group walked through &amp; a man in drag performed for children on a giant eggplant.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
4/ Is this “safe?” GARM member <a href="https://twitter.com/tiktok_us?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@TikTok_US</a> sponsored the 2022 LA Pride Parade, where a half naked bondage group walked through &amp; a man in drag performed for children on a giant eggplant 📹 <a href="https://twitter.com/DrewHLive?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@DrewHLive</a> <a href="https://t.co/l2XaTq8OeT">pic.twitter.com/l2XaTq8OeT</a>
&mdash; Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1690132301194072064?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 11, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“[Meta] thinks this video of [trans activist Dylan] Mulvaney appropriating &amp; insulting womanhood, a ‘Debated Social Issue’ that obviously ‘demeans’ women, is ‘safe,’” Shapiro highlighted. 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
5/ <a href="https://twitter.com/Meta?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Meta</a> thinks this video of Mulvaney appropriating &amp; insulting womanhood, a “Debated Social Issue” that obviously “demeans” women, is “safe:” <a href="https://t.co/1ZZ3UJXh1J">pic.twitter.com/1ZZ3UJXh1J</a>
&mdash; Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1690132303958130688?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 11, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“But GARM member [Youtube] apparently thinks [Daily Wire host Michael Knowles] discussing loving ways to respond to gender confused young people is so ‘unsafe’ they deleted it from their platform,” he said, captioning the video of Knowles. 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
6/ But GARM member <a href="https://twitter.com/YouTube?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@YouTube</a> apparently thinks <a href="https://twitter.com/michaeljknowles?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@MichaelJKnowles</a> discussing loving ways to respond to gender confused young people is so “unsafe” they deleted it from their platform. <a href="https://t.co/6wVuzK00px">pic.twitter.com/6wVuzK00px</a>
&mdash; Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1690132306948739073?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 11, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Shapiro further noted that Daily Wire hosts “can’t even present the case for why much of the trans content is harmful to children or demeaning to women — because that gets forcibly deleted by [YouTube] too. Are these ‘unsafe?’” 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
7/ <a href="https://twitter.com/realDailyWire?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDailyWire</a> hosts can’t even present the case for why much of the trans content is harmful to children or demeaning to women — because that gets forcibly deleted by <a href="https://twitter.com/YouTube?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@YouTube</a> too. Are these “unsafe?” <a href="https://t.co/1prjNjAyzX">pic.twitter.com/1prjNjAyzX</a>
&mdash; Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1690132312699138050?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 11, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Shapiro then posted video of Disney “apparently paying a grown man to dress up as a cartoon female mouse whose primary audience is meant to be little children,” adding, “Is this ‘safe’?” 
“These guidelines aren’t designed to keep brands ‘safe,’ but to advance a specific (and extreme) narrative,” he finished the thread. “The mass implementation of these “brand safety” guidelines demands serious scrutiny.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
7/ <a href="https://twitter.com/realDailyWire?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDailyWire</a> hosts can’t even present the case for why much of the trans content is harmful to children or demeaning to women — because that gets forcibly deleted by <a href="https://twitter.com/YouTube?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@YouTube</a> too. Are these “unsafe?” <a href="https://t.co/1prjNjAyzX">pic.twitter.com/1prjNjAyzX</a>
&mdash; Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1690132312699138050?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 11, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Shapiro, and The Daily Wire more broadly, are no strangers to censorship &#8212; like most conservative media. In fact, memos obtained this month by the House Judiciary Committee reveal the Biden White House pressured another Big Tech platform, Facebook, to stifle The Daily Wire’s reach in an effort to promote the administration’s policy goals related to the COVID vaccines.
One note, dated April 14, 2021, reveals that the White House met with Facebook executives to pressure the tech giant to change its algorithm to downgrade posts from The Daily Wire and other “polarizing” entities. White House digital director Rob Flaherty asked Facebook to promote what he called “authoritative” media, such as The New York Times, over The Daily Wire. 
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://onelink.to/dwapp" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-5099">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
“If you were to change the algorithm so that people were more likely to see NYT (New York Times), WSJ (Wall Street Journal), any authoritative news source over Daily Wire, Tomi Lahren, polarizing people. You wouldn’t have a mechanism to check the material impact?” Flaherty said to Facebook executives.
Another note reveals Flaherty becoming frustrated that Facebook couldn’t provide some of the data the White House wanted, so he pushed the platform to “play ball.”
“I feel like we’re running around in circles. Some partners give us lots of information, some partners tell us to f*** right off,&#8221; Flaherty said. &#8220;This feels like we’re chasing our tails. If you don’t want to give information, just say that. I don’t want to feel like I’m going to a dog and pony show. My dream [is] for [Facebook] to play ball. It’s about, will we get out of this f***ing mess.”
Additionally, House Judiciary Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/media/jim-jordan-outlines-facebooks-cozy-relationship-biden-white-house-how-censored-free-speech">revealed</a> that a Facebook employee in April 2021 circulated an email for Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg that said, &#8220;&#8216;We are facing continued pressure from external stakeholders, including the [Biden] White House’ to remove posts.&#8221; 
Shapiro last week responded to the release of the memos, which he said expose a clear First Amendment violation.
“We are absolutely pleased to look into the effect on our business of the Biden White House, engaging in an absolute First Amendment violation,&#8221; he said. &#8220;There&#8217;s no question this is a First Amendment violation. It is as simple as that. It is a First Amendment violation because the federal government cannot force or even pressure a private company into censoring information &#8212; that is a First Amendment violation, pretty clearly.”
Leif Le Mahieu contributed to this report.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ben-shapiro-takes-on-corporations-behind-censorship">Ben Shapiro Takes On Corporations Behind Censorship</a>

FACTS – Ep 1 Newsguard Final v2 NO TEXTURE

YouTube Reverses Course After Throttling Ben Shapiro’s Video Uncovering Corporations Behind Censorship

Ben Shapiro

COVID-19

The Daily Wire

YouTube

The <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/fbi" target="_blank" rel="noopener">FBI</a> facilitated censorship requests against American citizens from a Ukrainian intelligence agency that has likely been compromised by Russian actors, according to a House committee report released Monday. 

The 26-page <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/fbi-sbu-staff-report-7.10.23-sm.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">report</a> from the House Judiciary Committee and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government accused one of America’s top law enforcement agencies of violating Americans’ First Amendment rights and potentially undermining U.S. national security. After Russia invaded Ukraine, the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) sought to fight supposed Russian influence on social media and levied the power of the FBI for its mission. 
“The SBU enlisted the FBI in support of this effort, transmitting to the FBI lists of social media accounts that allegedly ‘spread Russian disinformation.’ The FBI, in turn, routinely relayed these lists to the relevant social media platforms, which distributed the information internally to their employees in charge of content moderation and enforcement,” the report said. 
As reported in the Twitter Files, DOJ officials <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/a-judge-blocked-the-feds-from-meeting-with-social-media-giants-heres-how-the-government-colluded-with-big-tech" target="_blank" rel="noopener">regularly met</a> with social media executives at Meta, Twitter, Google, Microsoft, and others to discuss “misinformation” spreading on the platforms and how the social media sites could crack down on supposed untruthful speech. The new House committee report showed that the FBI flagged accounts and posts for social media companies at the behest of the SBU, including posts from “authentic accounts of Americans … a verified U.S. State Department account and those belonging to American journalists.”
“At times, the FBI would even follow up with the relevant platform to ensure that ‘these accounts were taken down.’ Regardless of its intended purpose in endorsing the SBU’s requests, the FBI had no legal justification for facilitating the censorship of Americans’ protected speech on social media,” according to the report.
As the FBI was coordinating with the SBU to censor Americans’ speech, Russian actors who had reportedly infiltrated the Ukrainian agency could have been influencing decisions made by the agency, according to the House committee report. Last July, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky fired the head of the SBU, citing dozens of cases of those under his authority working with Russian agents, Reuters <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraines-president-fires-security-service-chief-prosecutor-general-2022-07-17/#:~:text=KYIV%2C%20July%2017%20(Reuters),by%20officials%20in%20their%20agencies." target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>. 
Months before Zelensky’s attempted crackdown on Russian agents within his intelligence team, an FBI agent sent an email to Meta in March 2022, specifying accounts that the SBU wanted the social media giant to censor, according to the report. 
“I have a few more Instagram and [Facebook] accounts that according to the SBU spread Russian disinformation. For your review and action as deemed appropriate,” special agent Aleksandr Kobzanets wrote to a Meta employee on March 1, 2022. 
<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=1688648178298000&amp;usg=AOvVaw10v0UGh9BJZV8inaPuI6t7">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Kobzanets also attached two spreadsheets to his email, containing thousands of accounts and posts suspected of “spread[ing] Russian disinformation.” Most of the posts and accounts belonged to people living in Russia and Belarus, but accounts belonging to Americans were interspersed throughout the spreadsheets. Some of the American accounts included in the spreadsheet belonged to “a photographer working with a studio in New York; a manager of a moving company in South Carolina; a musician and vocalist based in Minnesota; a professor at a university in California; and a children’s book author living in Washington state,” the report said. 
The report added that it was unclear if the FBI took any steps to vet the lists of accounts and posts sent to them by the SBU. The FBI also forwarded lists of YouTube accounts that the SBU wanted to be censored, many of which were removed by the platform. 
Twitter also received a list from the FBI, and the company&#8217;s Head of Trust and Safety Yoel Roth warned that the list included American and Canadian journalists, writing to agent Kobzanets, “Any additional information or context … is of course welcome and appreciated.” But Kobzanets simply responded to Roth’s concern by saying it was “[u]nlikely there will be any additional information or context.” 
Despite revelations from the Twitter Files sparking widespread criticism of the Department of Justice’s relationship with social media companies and a federal judge <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/federal-judge-blocks-biden-officials-from-contacting-social-media-companies-report" target="_blank" rel="noopener">blocking</a> numerous agencies from contacting Big Tech, the report said that it appears the “FBI’s cooperation with the SBU remains ongoing.”
“This report details misconduct by the FBI that is unconstitutional,” the House committee report said. “It is also counterproductive to the professed aims of the Biden Administration regarding U.S. support for Ukraine, and it endangers our national security. The FBI’s conflation of domestic speech with foreign malign influence poses a grave threat to Americans’ civil liberties.”

Ukraine/FBI

FBI Worked With ‘Compromised’ Ukrainian Intel Agency To Censor Americans, Report Says

FBI Worked With 'Compromised' Ukrainian Intel Agency To Censor Americans, Report Says

Global Politics

Ukraine

Volodymyr Zelensky

A federal judge denied a request from President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/joe-biden">Joe Biden</a>&#8216;s administration, saying that he would not grant a stay of his own order barring the administration from contacting social media companies.
U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/judge-refuses-biden-administrations-request-suspend-order-limiting-contact-social-media-companies?intcmp=tw_pols" target="_blank" rel="noopener">denied the request</a> on Monday, which was meant to allow members of the Biden administration to continue communicating with social media companies until the case has been appealed.
Doughty <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/federal-judge-blocks-biden-officials-from-contacting-social-media-companies-report" target="_blank" rel="noopener">issued the initial order</a>, after reviewing what he said amounted to &#8220;evidence of a massive effort by Defendants, from the White House to federal agencies, to suppress speech based on its content.&#8221; On July 4th, Doughty said that based on said evidence, many within the Biden Administration would be barred from meeting or communicating with social media companies.
The injunction does not affect everyone in the administration, but does target a few key players in the White House and in top federal agencies. Among them are specific White House officials — including Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre — and agencies and certain officials from the Homeland Security Department, the Health and Human Services Department, the DOJ and FBI.
Some exceptions will be made particularly for law enforcement agencies with regard to efforts to flag criminal behavior, elevate national security concerns, and uncover potential election tampering.
The Biden administration quickly responded with a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-administration-to-appeal-judges-order-blocking-contact-with-social-media-companies" target="_blank" rel="noopener">promise to appeal</a>, filing the notice on July 5th, and had asked that a stay be granted in the meantime.
The initial case, filed by the attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri, alleged that the federal government had engaged in collusion with social media companies in an effort to censor what they considered to be &#8220;disfavored speech.&#8221;
Doughty, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, appeared to agree with the attorneys general and issued the injunction in response.

Rishi Sunak Hosts The President Of The United States In Downing Street

Judge Nixes Biden Request That Would Allow Contact With Social Media Companies

Executive

<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/state-department" target="_blank" rel="noopener">State Department</a> officials have reportedly canceled a meeting with <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/facebook" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Facebook</a> after a federal judge ordered that the Biden administration limit its communications with social media companies after describing an “Orwellian” relationship between the two. 
A Facebook employee told <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/07/05/missouri-biden-judge-censorship-ruling-analysis/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the Washington Post</a> that the social media company’s weekly Wednesday meeting with government officials had been canceled in light of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-administration-to-appeal-judges-order-blocking-contact-with-social-media-companies" target="_blank" rel="noopener">U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty’s decision</a> to grant an injunction in a lawsuit brought by Louisiana and Missouri over alleged collusion between the federal government and social media companies to censor “disfavored” speech in violation of the First Amendment.
The meeting would have covered topics like the 2024 election and potential hacking problems. Facebook was informed that the meetings had been “canceled pending further guidance,” according to the Facebook insider. 
Another meeting between Facebook and the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency could also face cancellation due to Doughty’s ruling. 
In his July 4 ruling, Doughty <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.189520/gov.uscourts.lawd.189520.293.0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> that opposition to COVID vaccines, opposition to masking, criticism of the 2020 election, true statements about the Hunter Biden laptop, and opposition to other government policies were all “suppressed” by the government. 
“During the COVID-19 pandemic, a period perhaps best characterized by widespread doubt and uncertainty, the United States Government seems to have assumed a role similar to an Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth,’” he <a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/news/judge-limits-biden-administration-contact-180939384.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a>. 
The White House has moved to appeal Doughty’s injunction, which will be in place as the case makes its way through the judicial process. A spokeswoman for the White House characterized the administration&#8217;s communications with social media companies as necessary for national security. 
“But we’re not going to apologize for promoting responsible actions to protect public health, safety, and security when confronted by challenges like a deadly pandemic or foreign attacks on our elections,” Sharon Yang <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/05/us/politics/social-media-ruling-government.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a>. “We’re also not going to apologize for believing that social media platforms have a responsibility — a critical responsibility — to take account of the effects their platforms have on the American people.”
<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=1688648178298000&amp;usg=AOvVaw10v0UGh9BJZV8inaPuI6t7">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Doughty, a Trump-appointed judge in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, said that many of the actions taken by the Biden administration amounted to political discrimination.
“It is quite telling that each example or category of suppressed speech was conservative in nature. This targeted suppression of conservative ideas is a perfect example of viewpoint discrimination of political speech,” he said.  
The ruling still allowed the government to warn of foreign election interference, cyberattacks, and criminal activity.

Facebook

Meeting Between State Department And Facebook Axed After Judge Warns Of ‘Orwellian’ Relationship

Meeting Between State Department And Facebook Axed After Judge Warns Of 'Orwellian' Relationship

Misinformation

State Department

<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/republican-party" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Republican</a> presidential candidate <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/vivek-ramaswamy" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Vivek Ramaswamy</a> revealed on Wednesday that he had been <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/social-media-censorship" target="_blank" rel="noopener">locked</a> out of his LinkedIn account over opinions he expressed about climate activism and the Biden administration’s policies with respect to China, raising concerns that <a href="http://dailywire.com/topic/social-media" target="_blank" rel="noopener">social media</a> companies are attempting to control the narrative in the upcoming <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/2024-election" target="_blank" rel="noopener">election</a> cycle.
Ramaswamy, a former pharmaceutical entrepreneur who unexpectedly <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/vivek-ramaswamy-top-private-sector-voice-against-esg-teases-possible-presidential-run" target="_blank" rel="noopener">entered</a> the presidential contest earlier this year, shared <a href="https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1661723333392474115" target="_blank" rel="noopener">screenshots</a> of an email he received from LinkedIn accusing him of “misinformation, hate speech, violence,” and other breaches of the platform’s user agreement.
“If they can do it to me, they can really do it to anybody,” Ramaswamy said in a video statement. “These aren’t really the actions of private companies. These are so-called privately held companies, or publicly traded private companies, that are doing the work of the government through the backdoor: silencing speech that the government would never dare to censor.”
<iframe loading="lazy" title="YouTube video player" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0JO0LEeIi_E" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
The email from LinkedIn added that the posts constituted “misleading or inaccurate information.” One status from Ramaswamy referenced by LinkedIn asserted that the Chinese Communist Party has been “playing the Biden administration like a Chinese mandolin” and “weaponized the ‘woke pandemic’ to stay one step ahead of us.” Another post contended that the “climate religion and its apostles in the ESG movement” would be opposed to shifting oil production away from the United States and toward Russia and China if they did not “have a different objective,” while a third said that “fossil fuels are a requirement for human prosperity.”
Ramaswamy added that the move from LinkedIn, which is owned by Microsoft, is “even more dangerous than direct government censorship in many ways, because it is a hybrid of corporate power and state power together, doing what neither one of them could do on their own.”
LinkedIn recently <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/linkedin-to-dismiss-hundreds-of-employees-kills-chinese-app-initiative" target="_blank" rel="noopener">shuttered</a> a Chinese career platform but continues to hire employees in the communist nation. The firm also faced backlash last month for implementing <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/linkedin-allows-recruiters-to-filter-job-candidates-by-race" target="_blank" rel="noopener">features</a> that let recruiters filter job candidates by race, sex, and other demographic characteristics.
Republican lawmakers, including presidential contenders, have long been subjected to social media censorship. Former President Donald Trump, currently considered a frontrunner in the Republican primary race alongside Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, was suspended from YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter after the January 6 protests at the Capitol Building, although the platforms have more recently <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/youtube-restores-donald-trumps-account" target="_blank" rel="noopener">restored</a> access to his accounts.
Technology companies and social media platforms have drawn backlash in recent years for censoring information critical of the federal response to the pandemic and the efficacy of public health mandates, as well as content interpreted by executives to be hateful or violent in nature. Several installments of the Twitter Files, a set of internal documents which new Twitter owner Elon Musk provided to investigative journalists, indicated that former executives <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-new-twitter-files-shows-how-federal-state-governments-monitor-americans-social-media-posts" target="_blank" rel="noopener">worked</a> with federal officials to restrict the advancement of certain claims, as well as leveraged shadow bans and suspensions against conservative and moderate users.
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://onelink.to/dwapp" data-sk="tooltip_parent">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
Some prominent social media companies have openly admitted to maintaining censorship operations. TikTok <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/tiktok-ceo-reveals-the-details-of-platforms-massive-censorship-operation" target="_blank" rel="noopener">revealed</a> last month that the firm, controlled by Chinese technology company ByteDance, hires “tens of thousands” of employees dedicated to content moderation. The platform has emerged as the most popular social media site for American youth.

Vivek Ramaswamy

Social Media Platform Locks Account Of Republican Presidential Candidate Vivek Ramaswamy

Menu