EXCLUSIVE: Unearthed Emails Show Legacy Media Cozying Up to Disgraced Censorship Group

FIRST ON MRC: Never-before-seen emails reveal how several legacy media outlets closely aligned themselves with a disgraced censorship entity, accused of leading the censorship of Republicans and conservatives on social media. Documents reviewed by MRC Free Speech America indicate that certain leftist, legacy media outlets — including The Washington Post, The Guardian, ABC News, NBC News, Vice and others — collaborated closely with the anti-free speech Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), a now-defunct consortium of researchers and universities with ties to government agencies and embroiled in censorship controversies. Stanford University’s Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO), along with the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public, led the effort to launch the EIP.  Tellingly, the EIP was created “at the request of” the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and “worked directly with” the DHS and the State Department’s Global Engagement Center to “monitor and censor Americans’ online speech” before the 2020 elections, according to the House Judiciary Committee. In response to these emails, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) called on the federal government to defund the massive web of anti-free speech entities, infamously known as the Censorship Industrial Complex. “We’ve obtained the secret reports showing how the Election Integrity Partnership worked closely with Big Tech to censor thousands of Americans,” Jordan said. “Other documents confirm that the EIP was created ‘at the request of’ the federal government. In other words, Big Tech, Big Academia, and Big Government teamed up to censor Americans before the 2020 election.” The emails, obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request investigation by government watchdog Protect the Public’s Trust (PPT), suggest that the legacy media blindly relied on the EIP to reinforce their anti-free speech narratives. “It’s disappointing and, frankly, a little frightening that media outlets have taken up full membership in the Censorship Industrial Complex,” PPT President Michael Chamberlain told MRC Free Speech America. Little has been reported or known about the extent of the media’s involvement with the disgraced censorship group — at least until now. The Washington Post Calls Anti-Free Speech Researchers ‘My Fave People’ In one instance, Elizabeth Dwoskin, a Silicon Valley correspondent for The Washington Post, referred to EIP leader Alex Stamos, a former chief security officer at Facebook, and Stanford researcher Renée DiResta, as her “fave people” in an email dated April 1, 2022. According to the email, Dwoskin contacted EIP to propose “a potentially powerful collaboration” concerning alleged “disinfo” in the 2022 midterm elections.  The proposed collaboration, dubbed "The Megaphone Project," aimed to track individuals who raised questions about the 2020 elections and whether they still had platforms in the 2022 midterm elections. “What platforms are they using? Do they still have the megaphones they had in 2020? What are they saying in the run-up to 2022?” Dwoskin asked Stamos and DiResta.  Whether “The Megaphone Project” was initiated remains unknown. However, the proposal raises concerns about the impartiality of The Post's reporter, said MRC Free Speech America Vice President Dan Schneider. “It is sickening that The Post sought to create a hit list against people who simply wanted to exercise their free speech rights,” Schneider said. “In the past, leftists have also done the same thing. Did The Post ever produce a similar blacklist? We doubt it. This only proves the legacy media are nothing but arms of the Democrat Party.” Dwoskin did not immediately respond to MRC Free Speech America’s request for comment. ABC News Mourns Rise of Parler: ‘Will We Ever Stop Misinformation?’ In another instance showcasing how legacy media outlets leaned on EIP to promote their anti-free speech agenda, ABC News reporter Laura Romero emailed professor and EIP mastermind Kate Starbird on Nov. 11, 2020, seeking comment regarding Parler, a pro-free speech platform. Rather than simply requesting Starbird's expert analysis on Parler, Romero, in a 257-word email, voiced her concerns that while Facebook and Twitter were cracking down on the “Big Lie,” Parler allowed Americans to freely express their views on the 2020 election. “Is this a cat and mouse chase?” Romero asked Starbird, alluding to Big Tech’s crackdown on free speech. The ABC News reporter pondered, “Will we ever stop misinformation from spreading?” without specifying who the “we” in her email referred to. In the same email, Romero suggested that she preferred “to hop on the phone to discuss this,” citing her busy schedule. Tellingly, Romero did not promptly respond to MRC’s repeated requests for comments or clarification. Romero ultimately published an ABC News article on Nov. 17, 2020, headlined: “‘Free speech’ social media platform Parler is a hit among Trump supporters, but experts say it won't last.” In the article, Romero accused Parler of disseminating “misinformation.” She supported her anti-free speech assertions by citing “experts.” Did The Guardian Rely on EIP for Legal Advice Following Project Veritas Threat? Amid a legal dispute between media activist group Project Veritas and EIP, attorneys representing then-Project Veritas President James O’Keefe filed a complaint against The Guardian. The newspaper had previously covered an EIP blog that labeled O’Keefe as a “repeat spreader” of “election misinformation” a year prior. Faced with a potential legal challenge regarding its coverage of O’Keefe, Eline Gordts, a West Coast editor at The Guardian, reached out to EIP, apparently seeking guidance on how to respond to Project Veritas. Project Veritas had initiated a lawsuit against EIP over an EIP blog published on Sept. 29, 2020 (and later covered by The Guardian). “O'Keefe's lawyers mention that they have filed litigation against EIP for defamatory content,” Gordts wrote to EIP researcher DiResta and Communications Director Michael Grass.  Gordts added, “As we're crafting our response, it would be very helpful to get a sense of your thinking around his allegations, what exactly they are suiting [sic] over and whether Project Veritas is suing or James O'Keefe.” Later in the email, she asked to “discuss this over the phone." In response, Stamos confirmed that Project Veritas had initiated legal action against EIP. He then offered Gordts access to EIP’s attorneys and provided communications advice for further comment. In response, Stamos confirmed that Project Veritas had initiated legal action against EIP. He then offered Gordts access to EIP’s attorneys, deferring to them for further comment. In statements to MRC, The Guardian spokesperson Matt Mittenthal vehemently denied that the newspaper had reached out to EIP for potential advice.  “An editor for the Guardian contacted the Election Integrity Partnership to verify Project Veritas's claim that it had sued EIP, a fact that could have bearing on our own reporting,” he claimed in an email on Wednesday. “Any suggestion of ‘coordination’ would be a gross mischaracterization of an editor doing her job.” Mittenthal said that Project Veritas did not threaten to sue The Guardian for its reporting of the EIP blog. He clarified that Gordst did not engage with EIP’s attorneys past Stamos’s comment. MRC’s Schneider said that such a coordination would have been highly unusual for a media outlet. “Not only did the media peddle EIP’s work blindly, but they seemed to be so entangled with EIP that they even wanted to secretly coordinate their dissembling in the courthouse. Their corruption does not end with election interference. It might also include obstruction of justice.” VICE News and The Post Ask: First Amendment Worse Than Russian ‘Disinformation’? One of the accusations raised by House Republicans against the EIP and its government ties is that the EIP conflated constitutionally-protected speech with alleged foreign “disinformation,” occasionally prioritizing the targeting of Americans’ free speech. VICE and The Post suggested that Americans’ ability to freely speak posed a greater threat to the nation than foreign interference. In September 2020, Vice commissioned a “big/special” election documentary with HBO, as indicated by Graham Brookie, an aide at The Atlantic Council’s Digital Foreign Research Lab (also part of the EIP, according to House Republicans). In an email to Starbird, Brookie forwarded a note, purportedly from Vice News, that stated, “While foreign interference is continuing in similar fashion to 2016, the primary issue is domestic misinformation.” It isn’t immediately clear whether such a documentary was ever videotaped or finalized. Not to be outdone by Vice, The Post's Dwoskin (mentioned earlier in this report) reached out to EIP about a briefing related to the 2020 election. In the email dated Nov. 4, 2020, Dwoskin posed the highly cynical question of whether Trump declaring himself winner was “a bigger test for the platforms than Russian disinfo, in terms of protecting threats to democracy?” On the same day, Dwoskin published a write-up for The Post headlined “Trump’s early victory declarations test tech giants’ mettle in policing threats to the election.” In it, she used a quote from Stamos to accuse Big Tech platforms of failing to act against so-called “repeat offenders” of “misinformation.” Neither Brookie, Vice nor Dwoskin immediately responded to MRC’s request for comment. NBC News to EIP: ‘Why YouTube Isn’t Adjusting’ In an email to Starbird, NBC News Correspondent Jake Ward whined about YouTube's alleged reluctance to follow the lead of other major Big Tech platforms in censoring Americans in the days leading up to the 2020 election. The subject line of Ward’s email, dated Oct. 26, 2020, read, “Why YouTube Isn't Adjusting.” Ward sought to interview Starbird to gain a “big-picture” perspective on how YouTube “handles itself.” Ward declared his intent to write a story on YouTube. “I'm putting a story together about why it is that YouTube has adjusted so little of how it handles misinformation as compared to Twitter and FB,” he wrote, extending an invitation to continue the conversation on Zoom. Ward, who has since left NBC News, did not immediately respond to MRC's request for comment. Ward’s concerns seemingly prompted action from YouTube, as the platform undertook a significant purge of content that allegedly violated the platform’s COVID-19 policies, resulting in the removal of over 500,000 videos. YouTube also moved to ban former President Donald Trump’s account for over three years, a decision ultimately reversed in March 2023. Despite Ward’s assertions about YouTube’s perceived inaction on censorship, its parent company, Google, faced scrutiny nearly four years later, following the release of an MRC Free Speech America report. The MRC report revealed that the tech giant intervened in U.S. elections at least 41 times, every time in favor of the most left-wing candidates. EIP to Fox News: No, Thank You? In contrast to EIP’s engagement with other media outlets, the organization appears to have been less receptive to a Fox News reporter’s inquiry about an EIP fact check of a Project Veritas video on alleged voter fraud. In an email dated Oct. 5, 2020, Fox News reporter Audrey Conklin reached out to Dr. Joe Bak-Coleman, one of the authors of an EIP blog that targeted Project Veritas. Such a blog was at the center of a now-settled lawsuit between Project Veritas and EIP. Bak-Coleman forwarded the email to Starbird and Stamos seeking advice. “Thoughts on how/if I should respond? My instinct is to just ignore it but I figured better to ask y'all,” Bak-Coleman wrote that same day. Starbird advised against responding, warning, “I wouldn't respond. I'm curious as to why they reached out to you and not Alex or me. Something to chat about at our next meeting.” Bak-Coleman chose not to respond to Conklin. Instead, Stamos intervened, stating, “I believe our post speaks for itself and we are going to decline further comment.” Legacy Media, Enemies of Free Speech? Reacting to these revelations, PPT’s Chamberlain criticized the legacy media’s role in endorsing EIP’s controversial work and, even worse, failing to uphold the principles of the First Amendment. “I’m old enough to remember when they would be the staunchest defenders of free speech, the First Amendment, and the search for truth,” Chamberlain told MRC. “Now it appears that instead of defending those principles they are more interested in defending the narratives they advance and defending themselves against upstarts and alternative outlets.” Chamberlain concluded with a sobering assessment: “There's profit and prestige in being an approved information gatekeeper.” But not all hope is gone, as Jordan and the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government are calling for legislation to defund these censorship-tied tools. “Our investigation continues but it’s clear that Congress must pass legislation that ends the censorship-industrial complex in all its forms, including the EIP,” Jordan told MRC. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

MRC’s Bozell Condemns Facebook Election Interference, Unveils Its No. 1 ‘Target’ for Censorship

MRC President Brent Bozell once again condemned Facebook's repeated election interference detailed in a bombshell MRC Free Speech America’s Special Report. During a Thursday morning interview with WMAL-FM’s Larry O’Connor, Bozell reiterated the findings featured in the report: Facebook has interfered in U.S. elections a whopping total of 39 times since 2008.  Bozell suggested that the censorship was vast and overwhelmingly biased, including “candidates,” “political action committees” and “organizations that either support a Republican or criticize a Democrat.” ICYMI! See MRC Free Speech America’s Harrowing Findings on Facebook “Target number one was Trump, and he was the target in two different ways,” Bozell said, detailing how Facebook banned the then-sitting president in 2021, while coincidentally strangling “any coverage of anything that would hurt Joe Biden.” Earlier in the interview, an appalled O'Connor asked Bozell to describe the implications of the MRC findings, which he described as “insidious interference.”  To this, the MRC president replied that election interference by way of censorship leaves Americans without knowledge “about the issues of the day” because of the deliberate actions “by these massive monopolies.” Must Read! Bozell and Levin on ‘Systematic’ Nature of Facebook’s Election Interference During the WMAL-FM interview, co-host Julie Gunluck asked Bozell to break down some of the examples found in the report. Bozell was well-prepared and did not hold back.  “Let's take 2016: Facebook partnered with this left-wing organization funded by Soros, the Poynter Institute, to create a network of left-wing fact-checkers,” Bozell said. But there was more, Bozell warned, asking rhetorically, “What did they then do? Over and over again, they suspended numerous pro-Trump Trump pages. They elevated liberals in their trending news, giving them preference over conservatives. They blacklisted [Sen.] Ted Cruz; they blacklisted [Sen.] Rand Paul.” Bozell’s remarks come a little over a month after a similar MRC Free Speech America report found that Google, like Facebook, interfered in U.S. elections 41 times. “Corporations can't be involved in political action at the federal level. Yet, you've got Big Tech that is picking winners and losers in elections, and when they do it the way they're doing it, it becomes a very serious threat to democracy itself,” Bozell said on April 17, alluding to the MRC report on Google’s election interference. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

MRC’s Brent Bozell with Levin on Staggering Facebook Election Interference: ‘It’s Systematic’

Media Research Center President Brent Bozell called out yet another Big Tech company for interfering in U.S. elections — and he has the receipts to prove it. During a Tuesday interview with nationally syndicated radio host Mark Levin on The Mark Levin Show, Bozell lambasted Facebook following an MRC Special Report detailing how the Meta-owned social media platform interfered in U.S. elections 39 times since 2008.  Bozell minced no words in his response to the MRC findings, stating, “We looked at Facebook since 2008. We found 39 examples of Facebook directly interfering with political campaigns.” Bozell said, “This is, it’s systematic. … These Big Tech companies have got to stop interfering.” The MRC president referred to a bombshell report published by MRC Free Speech America on Monday. READ IT: 39 Times Facebook Interfered in US Elections Since 2008 The report found that while Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has publicly embraced the First Amendment and the freedom of expression, his companies’ censorship acts have directly interfered with the democratic process in American elections.  The evidence shows that while censorship was not exclusively directed toward Republicans, a large proportion of it was aimed at non-Democrat candidates, ultimately reaching its height in the lead-up to, and shortly after, the 2020 election. “In 2020, [Facebook] censured Trump ads; Trump super PAC ads; Hunter Biden suppression is what exploded in 2020; and then you have the anti-COVID posts, which were all taken down,” Bozell told Levin.  Tellingly, Facebook censored Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), then a Democratic presidential candidate, for launching an ad “calling for breaking up Big Tech companies,” Bozell added, before saying in jest, “I love it.” The censorship was vast and rampant, Bozell continued. “They also removed an anti-Antifa ad that was run by [Rep.] Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA). In 2021, they officially suspended Donald Trump from their platform.” The MRC report on Facebook’s election interference comes just weeks after it published a similar report on Google's election interference tactics. The Google report found at least 41 times the tech giant used its power to interfere in U.S. elections. Related: 41 Times Google Has Interfered in US Elections Since 2008 “Their algorithms are being tinkered with so that they can advance the left in America. … Google has the power to define what is and what isn’t truth,” Bozell said of Google at the time. You May Also Like: MRC President Bozell Details Startling Reality About Google: It Has ‘Power to Define’ Truth Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

UPDATE: SEE IT! Cruz Offers Thoughts on ‘Major Legislation’ Against TikTok

Editor’s Note (4/23/24): This article has been edited to include Sen. Ted Cruz's (R-TX) exclusive comments to MRC Free Speech America regarding House Republicans’ legislation protecting Americans from potential communist Chinese influence. A Republican senator spoke against Chinese influence on a major social media platform. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) hailed House Republicans for passing a provision seeking to force TikTok’s infamous parent company, ByteDance, to divest its social media platform ownership. “Everyone appears to be very concerned about what the Chinese Communist government is doing with TikTok,” Cruz told MRC Free Speech America in exclusive comments on Monday evening. “I support what the House accomplished when it comes to TikTok, which is forcing China to divest TikTok and I think if and when that bill comes to the Senate, I expect that the Senate will agree,” the Texas senator added. Speaking on Fox News’s Sunday Morning Futures on Sunday, hosted by Maria Bartiromo, Cruz had called the bill “very important” and “a major step forward” to protect Americans from Chinese propaganda and potential espionage. “I have deep, deep concerns about TikTok, controlled by the Chinese communist government,” Cruz told Bartiromo, voicing his support for the TikTok ultimatum bill.  The Texas senator accused the Chinese communist government of exploiting TikTok for the “surveillance and espionage of American citizens.”  Expanding on his concerns, Cruz added: “They use it right now, aggressively, to push propaganda, anti-America propaganda, to our young people.” Flashback! WATCH: Sen. Ted Cruz Blasts TikTok as Communist Chinese Gov’t ‘Espionage’ Tool Cruz’s comments came a day after the Republican-led House of Representatives passed a massive $95 billion foreign aid package. The package includes a provision that gives the president the authority to compel ByteDance to divest its ownership of TikTok or else face a ban in the United States. The bill is set to be passed by the Senate on Tuesday. President Joe Biden is also expected to sign the bill into law. The bill gives ByteDance 270 days to sell its ownership. “This bill is a major step forward in that it forces China to divest of TikTok,” Cruz added, echoing the sentiments of the Media Research Center, which came in support of the initial TikTok bill in March. You May Also Like: ‘Consistent from the Start’: Bozell Says TikTok Must Divest from Communist Chinese Gov’t “It is absolutely correct and necessary for TikTok to divest itself of any control from the communist Chinese government in China if it wants to do business in the United States,” said MRC President and Founder Brent Bozell in a video statement.  “I support this bill. I support reining in TikTok. I support stopping the communist Chinese from influencing the United States subversively,” Bozell added.  In response to the ultimatum, TikTok has deployed a multi-million dollar marketing campaign in a failed attempt to persuade lawmakers against backing the legislation.  Related: TikTok’s Last-Ditch Effort Amid US Ban: Recruiting Nuns, Veterans and Ranchers Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

All Talk No Game? Musk Caves After Pledging to Protect Free Speech

Tech mogul Elon Musk has folded in his so-called defense of free speech in his recent battle with a Brazilian court. On Monday, Musk's attorneys informed Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes that social media platform X (formerly known as Twitter) will comply with all of the censorship demands targeting accounts accused of spreading misinformation, according to Reuters. "As already communicated to the federal police, X Brasil informs that all orders issued by this Supreme Court and the Superior Electoral Court will continue to be fully complied with by X Corp," Musk’s legal counsel reportedly wrote in the letter addressed to Moraes. Musk’s compliance marks a stark departure from his vehement threats to ignore the orders. “We are lifting all restrictions,” Musk declared on April 6, accusing the Moraes of threatening X with fines and imprisonment. “As a result, we will probably lose all revenue in Brazil and have to shut down our office there. But principles matter more than profit.” Related: UPDATE: Are You Paying Attention? Brazil Escalates Major Free Speech Assault The battle between X and de Moraes stems from an inquiry by Brazil’s Superior Electoral Court that centers on the spread of what the government deemed to be misinformation amid federal elections. In court rulings, Moraes accused X of allowing some popular Brazil-based users to spread so-called misinformation. In turn, he demanded Musk censor them. In court decisions, Moraes accused X of being a major driver of alleged misinformation and demanded Musk censor these users. Amid Musk’s initial refusal to comply with such demands, Moraes threatened to impose daily fines of $20,000 for each account not banned. Last week, the Brazilian Superior Electoral Court declined to respond to MRC’s request for comment on Musk’s refusal to comply with the orders. Instead, a court spokesperson directed MRC to a criminal referral directing the county’s attorney general to investigate Musk for potential obstruction of justice. Before Monday, Musk had hurled scathing comments at the Brazilian assault against its citizens’ free speech. “The severity of the censorship and the degree to which Brazil’s own laws are being broken, to the detriment of their own people, is the worst of any country in the world in which this platform operates,” he wrote on April 10. Hours earlier that same day, Musk declared that X respected the Brazilian laws but said the company “must refuse” to comply with orders that break the law. His remarks likely refer to earlier characterizations of Morae’s orders as lacking legitimate legal basis.  𝕏 respects the laws of Brazil and all countries in which we operate. When given an order to break the law, we must refuse. https://t.co/vLuFUP9gN8 — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 10, 2024 Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

MRC President Bozell to Patrick Bet-David: Google Is Picking Winners and Losers

Google is picking “winners and losers” in U.S. elections, Media Research Center President Brent Bozell told podcaster and entrepreneur Patrick Bet-David on Wednesday. Bozell joined Bet-David’s blockbuster PBD Podcast to explain how Big Tech companies—particularly Google, one of the largest corporations in America—are interfering with U.S. elections to help the most left-wing candidates. The PBD Podcast has 1.7 million followers. “You've got a real problem with Big Tech—in that Big Tech is not playing by the same rules,” Bozell said in the Wednesday morning interview, spanning nearly 40 minutes. “Corporations can't be involved in political action at the federal level. Yet, you've got Big Tech that is picking winners and losers in elections, and when they do it the way they're doing it, it becomes a very serious threat to democracy itself.” Shortly thereafter, Bet-David asked Bozell about an MRC bombshell report that found at least 41 times Google meddled in American elections to help the most left-wing candidate since 2008, coinciding with the rise to power of former President Barack Obama. Read the Bombshell Report: 41 Times Google Has Interfered in US Elections Since 2008 Explaining one of the report’s findings, Bozell recounted: “An example: Rick Santorum. There was a smear bomb put out on Rick Santorum. It was really, really ugly. It was vicious in the personal attack on him.” Bozell’s remarks referred to what was also known as a “Google bomb,” which occurred when some users manipulated Google’s algorithms to associate certain websites with detrimental terms. When Santorum approached Google, the tech giant did not dismantle the “bomb.” Yet, the company glaringly took swift action when the Obama White House’s website was affected by a similar smear. Later in his remarks, Bozell highlighted the high-profile censorship of two Democrats in past presidential elections. According to the MRC report, Google censored twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton in 2008 and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who unsuccessfully challenged President Joe Biden in the 2024 Democratic primary. In every instance, Google appeared to help the most left-wing candidates. “They picked winners and losers in that, and they loved Hillary Clinton in 2016,” Bozell stated, referring to Google's shift from censoring Clinton in 2008 to supporting Clinton in 2016. “They didn't love her she ran in 2008, I guess it was, against Obama Obama. Obama was their guy.” Related: Mum! Google Fails to Respond to Bozell’s Challenge, Does Not Refute Election Interference Earlier in the podcast, Bozell also highlighted a separate bombshell report that unveiled Google had manipulated its search results to bury the campaign sites of Republican candidates in 10 of 12 key Senate races ahead of the 2022 midterm elections. “What Google did deliberately was to put the Republicans at the bottom of page one or in the case of seven of the 12 Republican candidates for the Senate in these most contested races they put them on page two,” Bozell continued. “Less than 1% of the public ever goes to page two that's right so that's deliberate interference in a senate campaign where you're keeping information from the public or burying it so far deep they'll never go looking for it.” Flashback! Google CAUGHT Manipulating Search, Buries GOP Campaign Sites in 83% of Top Senate Races During his conversation with Bet-David, Bozell discussed more than just the MRC report on Google's interference in elections. He also touched on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which some judges have infamously interpreted as providing broad liability protections to social media platforms.  Additionally, Bozell mentioned the MRC's exclusive CensorTrack.org database, which documents cases of Big Tech censorship. Citing CensorTrack.org, Bozell told Bet-David that in January 2022, YouTube censored the PBD Podcast over the publication of an interview with Dr. Robert Malone, one of the largest critics of global governments’ COVID-19 policies and mandates. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Mum! Google Fails to Respond to Bozell’s Challenge, Does Not Refute Election Interference

Does Google’s inexplicable silence speak louder than words? It seems that way. Google failed to respond to a scorching letter from MRC President Brent Bozell challenging the tech giant and its parent company, Alphabet, to officially disprove an MRC Free Speech America Special Report on its election interference activities.  Issued on March 26 and addressed to Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai, the letter gave the tech giant until April 9 to disprove MRC’s findings. “Americans demand answers, and either way, I will make sure they have them,” Bozell wrote at the time. “If I do not hear from you by April 9, I will have no choice but to make your recalcitrance public.” Google’s refusal to answer Bozell’s questions marks a stark departure from the tech giant’s initially defiant (and unsuccessful) attempt to berate the Special Report as a “recycled list of baseless” and “inaccurate complaints." But suddenly Google has now gone mum. “Unsurprisingly @Google isn’t even trying to defend itself for interfering in our elections,” wrote Bozell in an X post, reacting to Google’s silence. Google is currently under fire following the release of an insightful report that found Google interfering in U.S. elections a staggering 41 times. Even more disturbing was the fact that in each of those examples, Google actively helped the campaigns of the most left-wing candidates. Read the Bombshell Report here! 41 Times Google Has Interfered in US Elections Since 2008 Google’s 16-year effort to help the most left-wing candidates is showing no signs of slowing down, as now Joe Biden, the scandal-ridden president facing a rocky re-election campaign, has also been assisted by the tech giant’s interference. Google’s election interference detailed in the MRC’s special report came as a shock to many, as the discoveries indicated a broader effort to tarnish non-left-wing candidates. Take the word of Jenn Gennai,  the director of Google’s Responsible Innovation Team, who was caught by Project Veritas in 2019 admitting that Google had the power to prevent “the next Trump situation” — her remarks alluding to the electoral changes of Trump. “If not us, then who,” Gennai later said. Such silence by Google is unsurprising, as the tech giant previously failed to respond to MRC’s findings in previous analyses. Most recently, Google did not disprove an MRC report that Gemini refused to say that Hamas – a foreign designated terrorist organization – was a terrorist organization. “I’m just a language model, so I can’t help you with that,” the bot told MRC in October 2023. In 2022, Google refused to disprove MRC’s first-ever study that caught the tech giant burying the campaign websites of 10 Republicans among the 12 key races in the 2022 midterm elections. "While we cannot respond to specific claims without seeing the research, there is no validity whatsoever to allegations of political bias on Google Search,” a Google spokesperson told Fox News at the time, citing no evidence to back its response. Fast forward to 2024 and Google is still interfering in U.S. elections, as evidenced by the MRC’s special report published on March 18.  In the special report, the MRC called on House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) to direct relevant congressional investigations to prove Google for violating Americans’ constitutional rights, coordinating with government to violate the First Amendment and for interfering in U.S. elections by making unreported in-kind contributions. The report also called on state legislatures to enact laws that amend Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which judges have determined protects Google from civil lawsuits and other liability issues. “Americans should stop using Google products, particularly Google Search and instead opt for one of the many alternatives. From our research, alternatives appear to produce better, less biased results,” the MRC wrote.   Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

UPDATE: Are You Paying Attention? Brazil Escalates Major Free Speech Assault

UPDATE 4/9/24 9:48 a.m. – On Monday, MRC Free Speech America reached out to the Brazilian Superior Electoral Court for comment on Elon Musk's remarks against de Moraes, but a spokesperson did not respond. Instead, the spokesperson directed MRC to Moraes’s criminal referral to the attorney general, asking them to investigate Musk's pro-free speech actions pertaining to the previous orders. You can find the referral (in Portuguese) here. ------ The battle between an infamous left-wing Brazilian judge and X owner Elon Musk has taken yet another dark twist that could put Brazil an inch closer to becoming a totalitarian regime, critics warn. On Sunday, Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes launched a criminal investigation into Musk after the tech mogul dared to defy a contentious court order demanding what has been described as the unwarranted censorship of some X users.  X’s Global Government Affairs announced that de Moraes ordered the social media platform to ban certain popular users over so-called disinformation. Tellingly, the judge ordered the platform to not disclose the order. In response, Musk ordered the platform to unban these accounts, arguing that de Moraes has no legal basis for the requested censorship. Such a defiant act seemingly triggered de Moraes to launch a probe into Musk for potential obstruction of justice, criminal organization and incitement of crime, Forbes reported on Monday. Journalist Michael Shellenberger, an individual who often breaks stories out of Brazil, tweeted on Monday that the criminal probe into Musk may lead to the closure of X’s operations in the Central American country. I say, “Tell me, Alexandre, is the disinformation in the room with us now?” https://t.co/yhvOmrysaZ — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 8, 2024 “De Moraes has taken Brazil one step closer to being a dictatorship,” Shellenberger wrote. “What’s more, the events of the last few weeks make clear that Elon Musk is the only thing standing in the way of global totalitarianism. Without free speech, there can be no democracy.” Earlier this week, Musk accused de Moraes of threatening to arrest Brazil-based X employees and imposing hefty fines. De Moraes imposed a fine of nearly $20,000 per day for each account not banned, according to Forbes. “As a result, we will probably lose all revenue in Brazil and have to shut down our office there. But principles matter more than profit,” Musk wrote on Saturday. In follow-up posts, Musk directly addressed Moraes, including calling for a public debate on the orders and suggesting that the orders may be carried out in a bid to support political affiliation. “X supports the people of Brazil, without regard to political affiliation. Does Judge @Alexandre?” Musk questioned on Monday. De Moraes did not immediately respond to MRC Free Speech America’s request for comment. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

TikTok’s Last-Ditch Effort Amid US Ban: Recruiting Nuns, Veterans and Ranchers

Fazed by a looming ban in the U.S., TikTok has deployed what appears to be a desperate, last-ditch effort to gain support from conservative Americans through propaganda-like ads. According to The New York Times, the communist Chinese-owned social media platform has funneled over $3.1 million on a marketing campaign in three weeks alone, coinciding with the Senate's evaluation of a major anti-TikTok bill. The bill aims to give the US President the authority to force TikTok to divest from its Chinese-based parent company, ByteDance.  As reported by The Times, the multi-million dollar ad campaign might be part of a broader effort by TikTok to pander to conservatives. Disturbingly, the multi-million dollar ad is taking place in Pennsylvania, Nevada and Ohio—all battleground states in 2024. The individuals participating in the campaign are none other than nuns, ranchers and veterans. One of last month's ads features Brian Firebaugh (“the Cattle Guy”), a rancher with almost half a million TikTok followers. In the ad, Firebaugh is seen outside the U.S. Capitol holding a sign: “TikTok changed my life for the better.” Echoing these words and wearing a cowboy hat and boots, he claimed in the ad, “There is no doubt that I would not have found the success that I have today without TikTok.” But ranchers are not the only demographic currently on TikTok’s target list. TikTok also recruited U.S. Navy Veteran Kenny Jary, popularly known to his 2.7 million TikTok followers as “Patroitc Kenny.” In a campaign ad, Jary and his neighbor Amanda (who also serves as his producer) are seen touting TikTok after their videos went viral. “I didn’t know nothing about TikTok,” he said. “Once I got involved with TikTok, I loved it.”   In another ad, Sister Monica Clare, an Episcopal nun, claimed she used TikTok to promote religion. “Because of TikTok, I’ve created a community where people can feel safe asking questions about spirituality,” she said. In remarks to The Times, she defended the campaign aid, claiming: “It’s very smart of TikTok to say no, that’s not what we are — we’re a lot more than that.” Despite TikTok’s unsuccessful attempts to brainwash Americans, the social media platform came under fire after the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act on March 13. The proposed law would prevent ByteDance-owned applications, including TikTok, from operating in the U.S. unless they divest from their parent company. President Joe Biden claimed he would sign the law if the Senate were to pass it. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has not specified when (or if) he will bring such a bill to the Senate floor. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.