Tag Archive for: donald trump censorship

Government Censorship Project Boasted of Suppressing Trump Message, Defunding Newsrooms

For years, my colleagues and I have been fighting this enormous machine of censorship. We knew it was an immense machine but we did not know the US government was behind it.

Key group in government censorship project boasted of suppressing Trump message, defunding newsrooms

Democracy Dies in Darkness? A new memo from the taxpayer-funded National Endowment for Democracy shows grantee Global Disinformation Index viewed silencing Trump and toxifying certain news outlets to reduce their revenues as a win. The policy spread to other federal programs.

By Steven Richards and John Solomon, Just The News, May 19, 2025:

A nonprofit that received federal funding to develop censorship strategies boasted in progress reports to the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) that early tactics had suppressed the reach of Donald Trump’s messaging and reduced advertising by $100 million to news outlets it deemed to be “disinformation” spreaders, according to newly disclosed memos.

The Global Disinformation Index (GDI) was awarded grants through its U.S.-based affiliate, AN Foundation, from NED, a congressionally chartered and taxpayer-funded agency in Washington. The grants were paid to develop strategies on how to fight perceived disinformation in foreign countries.

But GDI’s quarterly progress reports often explicitly boasted about the impact of censorship efforts on American targets and audiences.

For instance, it touted to the NED that it had created a report called “Bankrolling Bigotry: An Overview of the Online Funding Strategies of American Hate Groups” that relied heavily on research from the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center to warn that “hatred is surging across the United States, threatening the safety, security and wellbeing of minority communities.”

You can read that report here: bankrolling-bigotry-3.pdf

Demonetization: Trying to bankrupt news outlets

Similarly, it boasted about its recommended tactics. Specifically, urging advertisers to choke revenue to news outlets that the index deemed to spread disinformation had an enormous early impact, it wrote.

“This period, we turned our minds to evaluation of GDI’s impact; specifically, to how we might measure the demonetization achieved through uptake of our risk ratings by brands and/or ad tech platforms,” GDI wrote. Demonetization refers to the practice of pressuring advertisers and gaming search engines in order to reduce, or even remove, earnings from YouTube and other social media platforms relied upon by publishers.

Partnering with a “trusted ad tech analytics organization,” GDI estimated that during a 15-month period, from March 2020 to September 2021, the number of bids sent to the approximately 1,200 sites listed on its “Dynamic Exclusion List” was halved, leading to an estimated $100 million lost in collective revenue, the memo says.

You can read GDI’s grant agreement with NED and quarterly narrative reports below:
NED-GDI Grant Agreement and Quarterly Narrative Reports.pdf

GDI’s own index identified 10 American news media outlets as superspreaders of disinformation, almost all of them conservative voices, like The New York PostThe Daily Wire, Newsmax, The Federalist, and The Blaze, among others. The memos mentioned that, combined, the outlets identified by the index lost advertising, but did not identify them by name.

Michael Chamberlain, head of the nonprofit watchdog Protect the Public’s Trust, which obtained the documents under the Freedom of Information Act, said the memos proved that while NED’s effort was billed as targeting overseas propaganda, it ended up routinely focusing on suppressing American speech, mostly right-leaning or conservative in nature.

“The Censorship Industrial Complex was hard at work early in this decade, and they were using taxpayer dollars to do so,” Chamberlain told Just the News in an interview. “They effectively gave funding to GDI to look at disinformation, misinformation in foreign countries, such as countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America—Nigeria, India, Malaysia, Mexico are mentioned specifically in the grant application.”

Selectively suppressing political speech

Perhaps its most stark admission came when it cited a New York Times article on how the censorship industry’s effort to shut down Trump’s social media presence had undercut the former and future president’s reach and amplification. GDI bragged in the progress report about the “wider context” of its work that included research on Donald Trump’s social media reach after he was deplatformed by most U.S. social media apps in the wake of Jan. 6 and his departure from office.

“Our press coverage during the quarter included a front-page article in The New York Times citing GDI research on the dramatic drop in reach of Trump’s statements once the bullhorn of the social media algorithms was removed,” the group touted.

Mike Benz, the founder of the Foundation for Freedom Online and a major anti-censorship activist, said the documents were stunning and disturbing.

“I am absolutely disgusted by these revelations, as should be every American and every world citizen to see the US government, under the Biden administration, actively funding a full-out campaign to pressure advertisers to defund private independent news sites who competed with the Biden State Department’s media narratives,” Benz told Just the News.

“Everyone involved in this should be fired, and frankly, NED itself must be defunded,” he added.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

FBI Is Ramping Up Censorship Ahead Of 2024 Election

The FBI is a rogue agency that means to overthrow the very thing it was created to protect and defend.

FBI Ramps Up Censorship Efforts Ahead Of 2024 Election

By: Brianna Lyman, The Federalist, August 01, 2024:

‘FBI will resume regular meeting in the coming weeks with social media companies to brief and discuss potential FMI threats involving the companies’ platforms.’

The FBI is ramping up its censorship efforts ahead of the 2024 presidential election by increasing its coordination with social media companies after having started a quiet operation in February to censor information, according to a recent memo.

A Department of Justice (DOJ) memo dated July 12, 2024, from Associate Deputy Attorney General George D. Turner, states that following the Supreme Court’s decision in Murthy v. Missouri, the Biden administration has sought to censor information it deems to be “foreign malign influence” (FMI) information. That June decision obliterated the First Amendment’s right to free speech.

Following the Supreme Court’s stay in October 2023 of a 5th Circuit injunction restricting the FBI’s collaboration with Big Tech, the DOJ “began developing a standardized approach for sharing FMI information with social media companies that continued to appropriately account for First Amendment considerations,” the memo states.

The FBI began using the standard operating procedure in “early February 2024” and “actively sharing FMI threat information with social media companies on a continuing basis,” the memo explains, adding, “As part of that strategy, FBI will resume regular meeting in the coming weeks with social media companies to brief and discuss potential FMI threats involving the companies’ platforms.”

The memo further states that the DOJ’s Justice Manual includes a “framework” for the DOJ to follow when deciding whether to “disclose FMI operations” — such as if alleged “foreign influence operations” are purportedly spreading “covert foreign government propaganda or disinformation.”

But alleged “foreign malign influence” often isn’t so.

Federal Agencies Censored True Info in 2020

Just weeks before the 2020 presidential election, 51 former “intelligence officials” signed onto a letter falsely suggesting the bombshell Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation. The letter was “set in motion” by then-senior adviser to Biden’s campaign Antony Blinken, according to former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morrell.

The laptop had been authenticated by the FBI as early as November 2019, however, and has since been used as evidence against the Biden son in a federal gun case.

Despite the FBI’s knowledge of the laptop’s authenticity, the agency warned social media companies of so-called “Russian propaganda” and “hack-and-leak operations” by “state actors.” Almost immediately, Twitter and Facebook began throttling the reach of the story. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg later admitted that his platform suppressed the story following the FBI’s warning.

Supreme Court Guts First Amendment

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Murthy v. Missouri that the federal government can continue its collusion with Big Tech to censor and stifle speech it dislikes. Louisiana and Missouri sued the Biden administration after it “began coordinating with social media giants to censor posts [it] deemed unfavorable, even if said posts contained factually correct information,” my colleague Shawn Fleetwood explained.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Google Accused of ‘Insane’ Election Interference

Secret Service Tailspin Continues: ‘How Many Questions Do You Need to Ask before Somebody Gets Fired?’

2024 Georgia Election About To Explode

Who was Trump gunman talking to online that he took extreme measures to hide?

Trump: Biden/Harris White House run by ‘fascists, Marxists, communists’

RELATED VIDEOS:

Chinese citizen had documents linking China to President Trump’s assassination attempt

Robert Spencer Responds to FBI Trying to Recruit Agents From a Terrorist-Tied Mosque

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘Slippery Slope’: Internal Docs Show Just One Twitter Employee Raising ‘Serious’ Free-Speech Concerns Over Trump Ban

  • In the immediate aftermath of Jan. 6, a junior staffer at Twitter was the only employee that appeared to express “serious” concerns about the effect that banning then-President Donald Trump might have on users’ speech, according to author Michael Shellenberger Friday, citing internal documents provided by CEO Elon Musk.
  • The unnamed staffer’s comments stood in contrast to other employees, who, according to former head of trust and safety Yoel Roth, were not “happy” with Twitter’s position on Trump following the riots, Shellenberger reported.
  • “This now appears to be a fiat by an online platform CEO with a global presence that can gatekeep speech for the entire world – which seems unsustainable,” the staffer wrote, Shellenberger reported.

As Twitter executives sought a justification to ban then-President Donald Trump in the aftermath of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riots, only one employee appears to have expressed “serious” concerns about the potential impact the move might have on users’ speech, author Michael Shellenberger tweeted Friday, citing internal Twitter documents provided by new CEO Elon Musk.

The employee, a junior staffer, posted a message in a lower-level channel on the company’s internal Slack messaging system, questioning the “one off” nature of the decision, which did not appear to match with Twitter’s public policies, according to Shellenberger. Twitter employees usually considered moderation decisions to be “one off” events when they were made at the discretion of Twitter employees, as opposed to following a particular policy, Shellenberger reported.

“This might be an unpopular opinion but one off ad hoc decisions like this that don’t appear rooted in policy are [in my opinion] a slippery slope and reflect an alternatively equally dictatorial problem,” the unnamed staffer wrote, according to Shellenberger. “This now appears to be a fiat by an online platform CEO with a global presence that can gatekeep speech for the entire world – which seems unsustainable.”

Roughly 40 minutes after the junior staffer posted their initial concerns, they sent a follow-up message, citing an article by The Washington Post’s Will Oremus, then a writer for tech publication OneZero, which noted that Facebook’s decision to indefinitely ban Trump “lacks a clear basis in any of Facebook’s previously stated policies, highlights for the millionth time that the dominant platforms are quite literally making up the rules of online speech as they go along,” Shellenberger reported.

“My concern is specifically surrounding the unarticulated logic of the decision by FB,” the staffer wrote, according to Shellenberger. “That space fills with the idea (conspiracy theory?) that all … internet moguls … sit around like kings casually deciding what people can and cannot see.”

While Twitter employees debated the decision to ban Trump, then-CEO Jack Dorsey was on vacation in French Polynesia, ultimately delegating a significant amount of the company’s actions during the crisis to former head of Trust and Safety Yoel Roth and former head of Legal, Policy and Trust Vijaya Gadde, Shellenberger reported. Dorsey sent staffers an email on Jan. 7 telling employees that the company needs to maintain consistent moderation policies, according to Shellenberger. (RELATED: Twitter’s Chief Censor Met Weekly With US Intelligence Officials While Trump Was In Office, Internal Comms Reveal)

“Jack’s emails have been _fine_… but ultimately, I think people want to hear from Vijaya, or Del, or someone closer to the specifics of this who can reassure them that the people who care about this are thinking deeply about these problems and aren’t happy with where we are,” Roth messaged an unidentified employee, according to Shellenberger. “A few engineers have reached out to me directly about it, and I’m chatting with them… but it’s so clear that they just want to know that _someone_ is doing something about this, and it’s not that we’re ignoring the issues here.”

The unnamed employee responded, arguing that some employees might not understand that “while it seems obvious and simple that we ‘should’ [permanently ban] his personal account,” the company would have to wrangle with the possibility of banning Trump’s official government account as well, a decision that required “thinking things through,” Shellenberger reported.

While the company had faced pressure to block or ban Trump in the past, it typically resisted those calls; the company’s Public Policy team posted a tweet in 2018 which argued banning world leaders for “controversial Tweets would hide important information people should be able to see and debate,” and would limit discussion of that leader without meaningfully silencing them, Shellenberger reported.

Twitter did not immediately respond to request for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.

AUTHOR

JOHN HUGH DEMASTRI

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: CAUGHT IN LIES: Latest Twitter Files Release Reveals Feds and Twitter Both Caught Lying, Hiding Evidence in Major Lawsuit; Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt Calls Them Onto the Carpet

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.