Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has openly acknowledged that the Biden-Harris administration exerted significant pressure on Facebook to censor content related to COVID-19, a move he now regrets, particularly regarding the platform’s handling of news about Hunter Biden’s laptop during the 2020 election cycle.
These revelations were detailed in a forthright letter to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), which has stirred considerable discourse on the integrity of public discourse and platform neutrality.
Mark Zuckerberg just admitted three things:
1. Biden-Harris Admin “pressured” Facebook to censor Americans.
2. Facebook censored Americans.
3. Facebook throttled the Hunter Biden laptop story.
Big win for free speech. pic.twitter.com/ALlbZd9l6K
— House Judiciary GOP 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 (@JudiciaryGOP) August 26, 2024
Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation – Save 10% With Code RVM10
In his communication, Zuckerberg detailed interactions with “senior Biden administration officials,” including direct involvement from the White House, urging the social media giant to suppress specific narratives and content amidst the pandemic in 2021.
This included material that Zuckerberg described as “humor and satire,” which he now believes should not have been censored. Reflecting on these actions, Zuckerberg expressed regret, stating, “I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it.”
Zuckerberg admits Facebook censored Americans after pressure from Biden-Harris Admin.
Facebook changed its enforcement practices in the wake of “pressure” from the Biden-Harris Administration to “censor” COVID-19 content, “including humor and satire.” pic.twitter.com/kaZ3fhXN6c
— House Judiciary GOP 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 (@JudiciaryGOP) August 26, 2024
Adding to the controversy is Zuckerberg’s admission regarding the suppression of the New York Post’s coverage of Hunter Biden’s laptop ahead of the critical 2020 presidential elections.
Initially, this move was justified by a warning from the FBI about a potential Russian disinformation campaign concerning Biden’s family and their dealings in Ukraine, particularly with the energy giant Burisma.
Zuckerberg tells the Committee the NY Post story on the Biden family’s corruption “was not Russian disinformation” and that they “shouldn’t have demoted the story.” pic.twitter.com/7BVQCnpRiv
— House Judiciary GOP 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 (@JudiciaryGOP) August 26, 2024
Zuckerberg told the committee, “That fall, when we saw a New York Post story reporting on corruption allegations involving then-Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s family, we sent that story to fact-checkers for review and temporarily demoted it while waiting for a reply.”
However, the subsequent acknowledgment that the reporting was not, in fact, Russian disinformation has led to a policy shift at Meta. Zuckerberg affirmed, “It’s since been made clear that the reporting was not Russian disinformation, and in retrospect, we shouldn’t have demoted the story.”
He assured the committee that steps have been taken to amend Meta’s policies, ensuring such preemptive actions aren’t repeated, stating, “We no longer temporarily demote things in the U.S. while waiting for fact-checkers.”
Zuckerberg’s letter also touched on his past financial contributions to local elections, known controversially as “Zuckerbucks,” which he does not plan to continue in the current election cycle.
Mark Zuckerberg also tells the Judiciary Committee that he won’t spend money this election cycle.
That’s right, no more Zuck-bucks.
Huge win for election integrity.
— House Judiciary GOP 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 (@JudiciaryGOP) August 26, 2024
Despite his stated intent for these contributions to be non-partisan, the initiative faced significant backlash, particularly from Republican circles, for perceived partisan influence.
This ongoing saga has prompted significant scrutiny from the House Judiciary Committee, which first subpoenaed Meta for documents and employee testimonies related to content moderation and potential government collusion in speech censorship on February 15, 2023.
The investigation aims to determine the extent of executive branch interference in private sector speech regulation, a potential violation of the First Amendment.
Meta has stressed its cooperation with the committee’s investigation, providing access to documents and personnel for interviews.
RVM News would like to make a point of clarification on why we do not refer to any shot related to COVID-19 as a “vaccine.” According to the CDC, the definition of a vaccine necessitates that said vaccine have a lasting effect of at least one year in preventing the contraction of the virus or disease it’s intended to fight. Because all of the COVID-19 shots thus far available have barely offered six months of protection, and even then not absolute, RVM News has made the decision hereafter to no longer refer to the Pfizer, Moderna, or Johnson & Johnson substances as vaccinations.
.
