Biden And DNC Accused Of Additional Twitter Censorship Maneuvers
In an era when the ever-growing power and reach of Big Tech have become a hot-button issue, a series of developments involving Twitter has garnered attention and criticism from many conservatives. With accusations ranging from government overreach to ideological favoritism, these events point to a complex relationship between the tech titan, the Biden administration and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).
Newly released court filings suggest that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) allegedly pressured Ernst & Young (EY), an independent auditor, to condemn Twitter for privacy violations. This complaint emerged after X Corp, owned by the outspoken free-speech advocate Elon Musk moved to terminate a pre-existing privacy settlement between Twitter and the FTC.
The court filings detail a series of interactions where the FTC reportedly dictated to EY “very specific types of procedures” they expected EY to perform, with an implicit expectation for a negative result. Musk took to Twitter to denounce what he characterized as the FTC’s “insanely illegal overreach.”
Since Musk acquired Twitter, the social media platform has faced increased scrutiny from governments worldwide as it leans into a pro-free-speech stance. While some have celebrated this development, it has caused friction with others, including the Australian government, the European Union, and, it seems, the Biden administration.
In a related development, new revelations from the “Twitter Files” show that the DNC urged Twitter to censor accounts sharing media coverage of Hunter Biden’s laptop ahead of the 2020 election. The flagged tweets, which included a link to a Gateway Pundit story, were initially deemed “non-actionable” under Twitter’s rules by the company’s GETSupport. However, these posts were later subjected to a “spam review,” resulting in nearly all the accounts being suspended.
The controversy doesn’t end there. In a letter from a senior Twitter attorney, it was noted that the platform worked with the DNC on “high-profile escalations.” In contrast, no similar collaboration with the Republican National Committee was mentioned. This distinction raises questions about potential ideological bias in Twitter’s operations and policies.
A recent federal court ruling adds another layer to this already complex situation. The court issued a preliminary injunction barring federal departments from colluding with Big Tech to silence political opposition. This ruling pointed to a seemingly dystopian scenario, with collaboration between Big Tech and the federal government to control the free flow of information and constitutionally protected speech to the public.
The ongoing controversy serves as a reminder of the necessity of transparency, impartiality, and the protection of free speech in the digital age. Freedom of expression should not be a casualty in the intricate dance between Big Tech, governments and political partisans.
