Government and media colluding to censor free speech

Against the backdrop of a federal district court judge allowing a case to move forward citing Joe Biden and other high ranking government officials and media companies with collusion to suppress free speech, the Media Research Council (MRC) has released a study identifying over 144 million instances of censorship by big tech media in just the first quarter of 2022. MRC, a reputable media watchdog, analyzed seven platforms–Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, TikTok, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Spotify—to determine the number of times that users on social media had information kept from them, what MRC calls “secondhand censorship.” Social media companies are suspected accomplices in the federal collusion lawsuit.

Missouri and Louisiana filed the collusion suit in US District Court against Government Defendants consisting of Joseph R. Biden, Jr., Jennifer Rene Psaki, Vivek H. Murthy, Xavier Becerra, Department of Health and Human Services, Anthony Fauci, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Alejandro Mayorkas, Department of Homeland Security, Jen Easterly, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, and Nina Jankowicz. The suit alleges that “Government Defendants have colluded with and/or coerced social media companies to suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content on social media platforms by labeling the content “disinformation,” “misinformation,” and “malinformation.””

The states provided examples of suppression of free speech, which included: The Hunter Biden laptop story prior to the 2020 Presidential election; Speech about the lab-leak theory of COVID-19’s origin; Speech about the efficiency of masks and COVID-19 lockdowns; and Speech about election integrity and the security of voting by mail. In addition the State’s complaint, “sets forth actions by specific Government Defendants that have been taken to suppress free speech. Plaintiff States allege that free speech is the bedrock of American liberty, and Government Defendants are in violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in attempting to suppress free speech by labeling the speech as “misinformation.””

In allowing the case to go forward, Judge Terry A. Doughty reviewed previous unsuccessful cases that were blocked because of the technicality of “lack of standing” and concluded: “If Missouri and Louisiana do not have standing under the facts alleged, when would anyone ever have standing to address these claims? In conclusion, the Court finds that the Plaintiff States have standing and that this Court has the judicial power to hear this case.” It’s interesting that the MRC study used many of the same examples of censorship in its analysis as are listed in the Missouri and Louisiana lawsuit. Free speech is central to Christianity. The Apostle Paul prayed in Ephesians 6:20 that he “may speak boldly, as I ought to speak.” These studies and court tests ultimately are essential to Constitutional protection of religious free speech.


Posted in

Bill Wilson

Recent Posts