The Censorship-Industrial Complex and How It has the Internet in its Grip By Janet Levy
Since the 1960s, the military-industrial complex has influenced and driven American policy to profit cynically from conflict and war. But in this decade, a new complex has arrived, one that is far more dangerous to American values. It is the censorship-industrial complex (CIC), which has gained tremendous control over the internet.
When the internet-backed World Wide Web was created in 1989, it democratized information and connectedness. Through rapid commercialization, it unleashed unlimited possibilities and economic growth. Equally, it became a haven of free expression, debate, and creativity. These ideals crystallized into the five principles of the 2012 Declaration of Internet Freedom: non-censorship; universal access; freedom to connect and create; the right to privacy and control of personal information; and protection for technology and innovation.
But governments and the elites that control them were quick to move in, sensing the threat to their authoritarian instinct. At work since 2016, the pernicious CIC gained strength during the Covid-19 pandemic, amplifying government-approved narratives that favored the agenda of the elites. Furthering the advance to the Great Reset, it now works to color content and discourse in the leftist hues that disguise the intent and operations of the global elites.
Mike Benz, a former State Department official who now heads the Foundation for Freedom Online and is a staunch campaigner against the CIC, reveals that the complex is controlled by the State Department, the Defense Department, the CIA, MI6, and Brussels. The turning points, according to him, were the Brexit referendum, the election of Donald Trump, and elections in the Philippines, in all of which the internet played an important role. Therefore, it was decided to end free speech on the internet and control the flow of information. Since the American government was hamstrung by the First Amendment, NGOs and fronts were enlisted for “doing the dirty work.”
The Biden administration continues on that path. In 2022, days after Elon Musk committed to a pro-free speech vision on acquiring Twitter, the White House issued the Declaration for the Future of the Internet, in direct contradiction with the 2012 Declaration of Internet Freedom. The language, of course, answers to all the shibboleths of freedom. But while criticizing the policies of “authoritarian” governments, the declaration calls for curbing “disinformation” and “harassment” in the pursuit of “reclaiming the promise of the internet.” It expresses concern about online platforms that spread “illegal or harmful content,” threaten safety and foment violence, and undermine “respect for and protection of human rights and democratic institutions.”
The question, obviously, is who decides what amounts to disinformation, harassment, and illegal or harmful content.
On May 1 this year, the Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, brought out a report that describes the CIC as an entity that assesses and removes unacceptable content, filters and manipulates search engine results, flags disfavored material, and deplatforms and silences offenders. It treats speech as a permitted activity rather than a fundamental right.
The policies of the CIC, the report says, are essentially designed to quash the hallmark feature of the internet as a forum for open discourse befitting a free society, a space where the truth is discovered through dialogue and debate, empowering people to hold governments accountable and hence significantly reducing the risk of tyranny.
Examination of tens of thousands of emails and documents exposed the extent of a White House campaign of censorship and pressure. The material revealed how Meta (the Facebook parent company), Alphabet (the YouTube parent company), and Amazon were coerced to censor videos, books, posts, and other online content and to change their content moderation policies.
Certain ideas and politics were proscribed from public conversation, undermining foundational democratic principles of valid discussion on important issues. Testimony even revealed that the U.S. government funded organizations to pressure advertisers to boycott platforms that refuse to censor certain kinds of information or opinion or curb them in the name of “fact-checking” or “countering extremism.”
As the Twitter Files were released from December 2022 to March 2023, suppression and cover-ups came to light. Among the revelations were the concealment of the Hunter Biden laptop story, President Trump’s suspension, the sidelining of tweets favorable to the events of January 6, the FBI’s influence in acting against accounts that questioned the results of the 2020 election, and Twitter’s participation in online influence campaigns in other countries.
The report also tells how Andy Slavitt, a temporary senior advisor to the Biden administration, raised a ruckus over something as innocuous as a Leonardo DiCaprio meme about the Covid-19 vaccine that appeared on Facebook. The meme (appearing on page 29 of the report) echoed the words of the many mesothelioma commercials from law firms offering to help get compensation for asbestos poisoning. It humorously suggested that ten years from now, like the victims of asbestos poisoning, that those who took the vaccine might become entitled to reparations.
When Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) subpoenaed the Amazon Files this February, as part of a House Judiciary Committee investigation, pressure from the White House to suppress content was exposed. One email from a senior executive official read: “Who can we talk to about the high levels of propaganda, misinformation, and disinformation at Amazon?” Books critical of the Covid-19 vaccine program, or deemed “disinformation,” were either removed or buried in the search results.
One global nonprofit headquartered in D.C., part of the massive web of entities constituting the CIC, stands out in Benz’s exposé – the Aspen Institute. Benz calls it a “taxpayer-funded CIA policy incubator and revolving door with the CIA, NSA, and the military” that plays a pivotal role in information suppression. It is also funded by the Carnegie Corporation, the Rockefeller Brothers Foundation, the Ford Foundation, Craigslist founder Craig Newmark, and George Soros’s Open Society Foundation.
In 2020, the institute established the Commission on Information Disorder to, among other things – believe it or not – determine acceptable levels of diversity in viewpoint and opinion! Once members decided something was “disinformation” or “misinformation,” it was looked on as a societal problem with “life or death consequences.” Blaming such material for decreasing levels of public trust in government institutions, members worked to block access to information that was politically inconvenient. Opposing viewpoints were deplatformed or banned, false narratives were presented, and propaganda was put out as press releases and news stories.
A 2021 report of the commission included short-term actions and long-term goals to mitigate what they described as “the current crisis of faith in key institutions.” Members have discussed the restraints they face from the First Amendment and Section 230 of the Communications Act. Some presented ideas for punishing misinformation, including posts that were correct but considered “mal-information.” They have proposed banning “savvy spreaders” rather than specific posts.
One commission member, former Soviet chess champion Garry Kasparov, no Trump-lover but all for preventing foreign disinformation, resigned from the commission, citing objections to “remaking media” and “promoting acceptable levels of workplace diversity.” He said, “…this type of approach was common practice in the U.S.S.R.” He was surprised that the group did not consider promoting viewpoint diversity. The resignation letter, addressed to Aspen Digital’s executive director Vivian Schiller, was not made public, but a FOIA request filed by journalist Matt Taibbi produced it.
As the machinations of the CIC come to light and people become aware of how the information they access is increasingly manipulated, it may be possible to return to a free internet. Now, the public knows how government mandates forced tech companies to toe the line on so-called misinformation. In 2023, 138 scholars, public intellectuals, and journalists from across the political spectrum framed the Westminster Declaration, warning of the CIC’s machinations and urging its dismantling. The pushback has begun, and must continue with full force.
Comments are closed.
