Judge blocks government from meeting social media giants; reveals government collusion with big tech.

Federal Judge Blocks Government Officials from Communicating with Social Media Companies

A federal judge in Louisiana has ignited a political firestorm with a Fourth of July injunction that prohibits numerous federal government agencies and officials from contacting and meeting with social media companies. This move has been hailed by conservatives who have expressed concerns about the close relationship between the government and Big Tech executives.

Following Judge Terry Doughty’s injunction, the State Department reportedly canceled a weekly meeting with Facebook. An employee at the tech giant revealed that meetings with the government had been put on hold until further guidance was provided. These meetings between federal government officials and tech companies have become increasingly common since former President Donald Trump’s re-election campaign in 2020. Let’s take a closer look at how the government and social media companies have become intertwined before, during, and after the COVID pandemic and the tumultuous 2020 presidential election.

Hunter Biden Emails

The collaboration between federal government agencies and social media companies intensified in the final weeks of the 2020 presidential election. Government officials frequently communicated about what they referred to as “Russian disinformation” surrounding a certain candidate’s controversial son, Hunter Biden.

This alleged Russian disinformation campaign gained traction on social media platforms until Twitter halted its circulation and Facebook censored the story. However, years later, through the Twitter Files and revelations from Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, the public discovered that the FBI had been in contact with Twitter and Facebook just days before the explosive New York Post story broke.

In Part 7 of the Twitter Files, journalist Michael Shellenberger, who had insider access to Twitter after Elon Musk’s takeover, reported that FBI Special Agent Elvis Chen sent 10 documents to Twitter’s then-head of site integrity Yoel Roth the day before the New York Post published the Hunter Biden email story. Shortly after the story went live, Twitter censored it, preventing users from sharing it on the platform. Months later, Roth admitted in a sworn declaration that he regularly met with the FBI, Department of Homeland Security, and Director of National Intelligence, where they warned of a potential “hack-and-leak” operation involving Hunter Biden.

The FBI also held meetings with Facebook in the weeks leading up to the New York Post story. According to Zuckerberg, the FBI approached Facebook, alerting them to the possibility of a significant data dump similar to the Russian propaganda seen during the 2016 election. In response, Facebook limited the distribution of the Hunter Biden story, ensuring that fewer people saw it than would have otherwise.

13. They did the same to Facebook, according to CEO Mark Zuckerberg. “The FBI basically came to us [and] was like, ‘Hey… you should be on high alert. We thought that there was a lot of Russian propaganda in 2016 election. There’s about to be some kind of dump similar to that.'” pic.twitter.com/yPGP8nYgCq

— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 19, 2022

2020 Election

The government’s interactions with tech companies extended beyond the Hunter Biden story. Independent journalist Matt Taibbi, who also had insider access to Twitter, revealed internal Slack communications between Twitter executives that showed the company meeting with federal government agents to discuss election-related posts and stories.

After the January 6th Capitol riot, Roth expressed frustration about the lack of generic calendar descriptions to conceal apparent meetings with FBI officials. In another conversation, Policy Director Nick Pickles questioned whether Twitter should describe the FBI and DHS as “experts” when discussing misinformation detection.

Additional screenshots of internal communications demonstrated that the FBI provided Twitter with reports about tweets related to mail-in ballots, a topic heavily scrutinized by Trump and his supporters before and after the 2020 election. Twitter responded by citing Politifact to label the first story as “proven to be false” and noting that the second story had been deemed “no violation on numerous occasions.”

Twitter addressed the FBI’s concerns by applying a “learn how voting is safe” label to one of the tweets.

COVID

In another entry in the Twitter Files, Free Press writer David Zweig reported that the United States government pressured Twitter and other social media platforms to promote certain content and suppress other content related to COVID-19. Both the Trump and Biden administrations directly influenced Twitter executives to moderate pandemic-related content according to their preferences.

During the early days of the pandemic, the Trump administration focused on combating “misinformation” about panic buying. They held meetings attended by Twitter, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and other companies, aiming to address these concerns.

When President Joe Biden assumed office in January 2021, one of his administration’s initial requests during a meeting with Twitter was to address “anti-vaxxer” accounts, particularly that of Alex Berenson. Twitter subsequently banned Berenson, who regularly expressed concerns about COVID vaccines. Berenson sued Twitter over the ban, and during the legal battle, internal communications were released, revealing how the White House pressured Twitter to remove Berenson from the platform.

10. Berenson sued (and then settled with) Twitter. In the legal process Twitter was compelled to release certain internal communications, which showed direct White House pressure on the company to take action on Berenson.

​​https://t.co/CHt0s7ZqfQ pic.twitter.com/dFgRmyRB3z

— David Zweig (@davidzweig) December 26, 2022

These examples highlight the close relationship between the federal government and social media companies, where the government has significant influence over censorship decisions. However, Judge Doughty’s injunction, prompted by a lawsuit from the attorneys general in Missouri and Louisiana, has temporarily restricted this relationship. The injunction is not the final ruling in the case, and the Biden administration has appealed the order blocking communication with social media companies. Nevertheless, the judge’s reasoning for the injunction emphasizes the government’s role resembling an Orwellian “Ministry of Truth” during the COVID-19 pandemic.

*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases