Global Free Speech Threat

Michael Shellenberger explains that real progress is being made domestically to protect free speech, but the EU is actively working to impose its authoritarian speech controls over US social media:

Since taking office, President Donald Trump has moved swiftly to dismantle the federal censorship infrastructure. In his first week, he signed an executive order barring agencies from funding or facilitating the monitoring or removal of lawful domestic speech.

His administration has phased out censorship-related NSF grants, eliminated the State Department’s Global Engagement Center, which had coordinated with outside groups to shape online narratives, and shut down USAID, which funded censorship advocacy in Europe and Brazil.

And Trump’s 2026 budget proposes cutting $491 million from the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency, which oversaw election and Covid censorship in 2020 and 2021.

But the threat to free speech remains and has even grown stronger around the world, particularly in Europe. The UK is arresting 30 people per day for speech crimes. In Germany, 14 little-known state media agencies (SMAs) empowered by the 2020 “Media State Treaty” now monitor private journalists for compliance with vague “journalistic diligence” standards while exempting public broadcasters from the same scrutiny. French authorities want mandatory digital identification for users of social media platforms.

The European Commission appears to desire the power to ban or censor whole platforms, particularly Elon Musk’s X. And an Irish newspaper this week reported that the European Commission accused Ireland of “failing” to comply with laws regulating hate speech.

The wind remains at the back of free speech lovers. The change of government in the U.S. is already influencing Europe, where officials appear to be reconsidering some of the most aggressive censorship policies. In the UK, American negotiators have raised concerns about free speech tied to the Online Safety Act.

At the same time, in the EU, the Digital Services Act enforcement faces legal and logistical delays. France has drawn criticism for prosecuting satirical speech, and in Germany, a CBS 60 Minutes segment has fueled backlash against selective speech policing. Meanwhile, some in Brussels worry that the EU’s growing alignment with censorship risks its credibility as a champion of liberal democracy.

Even so, there is reason to be alarmed by what’s happening in Europe, says the Foundation for Freedom Online’s Mike Benz. “The most existential threats are now shifting around the international landscape and how that boomerangs back to the U.S.,” he said in a new podcast. American censorship leaders are working with European governments and NGOs to impose European censorship on social media platforms.

“The University of Cambridge Social Decisionmaking Lab works with the Global Engagement Center at the State Department,” he said. “It works with CISA at DHS. It works with the entire USAID network and USAID funds dozens of these funds — University of Cambridge’s censorship work, London School of Economics, King's College, Sheffield College, Oxford Internet Institute — the State Department and USAID fund all these. And they effectively are a foreign group that is paid for by taxpayers to subvert the agenda taxpayers voted for. It's an incredible scandal.”

And Europe is reacting to the Trump administration by seeking to replace the financing it cut for censorship. “Just this week,” Benz said, “the EU announced a a giant science research fund, $500 million, as an initial pool of funding and said they are actively recruiting researchers from the United States who USAID funded to come get their funds so they can continue their work by going to the EU. And this is happening in tandem with a tense standoff between the Trump administration and the EU over everything from Russia-Ukraine to tariff policy to tech regulation to you name it. And so the EU is basically pumping up the shadow diplomacy aspect of the US.”

All of this is happening at a time when the ruling parties in Germany, France, and Romania are resorting to increasingly undemocratic tactics in what appear to be desperate attempts to hold onto power as populist challengers surge in the polls. In Germany, the domestic intelligence service has officially labeled the AfD “extremist” a transparent response to the new government’s weakness and the AfD’s new status as the nation’s most popular political party. In France, prosecutors banned Marine Le Pen from running for president at a time where she too is polling first nationwide. And in Romania, the high court disqualified the leading opposition candidate from running for president, which most believe is a reaction to his opposition to a new NATO base in Romania.

“What's happening in Europe right now is simultaneously highly optimistic, white-pilling, inspiring, but also dark, twisted, sadistic, calamitous, catastrophic, and apocalyptic,” said Benz. Populist political success has caused NATO and the EU establishment to have “prosecutors and judges nullifying or barring candidates from running when they're winning, and prosecutors taking them out so they can't run again or can't make their voices heard or can't campaign because they're in prison or outright barred.”

Why is this happening? What can be done about it?

Continue ReadingGlobal Free Speech Threat

Mike Benz Explains “Whole of Society” Censorship

Excellent presentation by Mike Benz. Topic is "Whole of Society" Censorship.

To Supplement, I asked Grok to summarize "Whole of Society" Censorship. Here is Grok's answer:

The "whole of society" censorship approach refers to a coordinated effort involving government, private sector, academia, media, and civil society to control information and suppress certain narratives. It’s characterized by:

* Collaboration Across Sectors: Governments partner with tech companies, universities, NGOs, and media to monitor and restrict content deemed harmful or misleading, often bypassing legal constraints through informal agreements.

* Preemptive Narrative Control: Instead of just reacting to content, this approach shapes narratives proactively, promoting approved messages while marginalizing dissent through algorithms, fact-checking networks, and deplatforming.

* Broad Scope: It targets not only explicit misinformation but also "malinformation" (true information presented in ways that challenge official narratives), affecting political discourse, science, and public health.

* Examples: Documents like the Twitter Files revealed U.S. government agencies working with social media platforms to flag or remove content. The 2021 Stanford Virality Project, involving academics and tech firms, monitored vaccine-related content to counter skepticism. * Mechanisms: Include content moderation, shadowbanning, account suspensions, and funding "trusted" sources to dominate information ecosystems.

Critics argue it stifles free speech and centralizes narrative control, while proponents claim it’s necessary to combat disinformation at scale. The term gained traction in discussions about COVID-19 policy enforcement and election-related content moderation.

Continue ReadingMike Benz Explains “Whole of Society” Censorship

Free Speech Hypocrisy

Nico Perrino (of FIRE) sternly points out the rampant hypocrisy.

Do we actually believe in free speech?

Do we actually believe controversial speakers have a right to speak in America — free from government censorship?

For the past decade, I stood alongside conservatives who loudly — and justifiably — protested when speakers like Ben Shapiro and Charles Murray were prevented from speaking on college campuses, often under the guise of vague appeals to "safety."

Will those same voices rise up now that the boot is on the other foot?

Do we actually believe in free speech as a principle, or merely as an expedient argument when our side is censored?

Do we actually oppose cancel culture?

Do we actually oppose the heckler's veto?

Do we actually oppose vague security rationales for censorship?

I will work with anyone to defend free speech in any scenario, even if doing so means those same people — whether they are the canceled conservatives of the past or the canceled left-wingers of the present — will sometimes abandon free speech when it's their side doing the censoring.

Believing in free speech is as simple as the golden rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Nat Henthoff's book title comes to mind: "Free Speech for me, but not for thee."

Continue ReadingFree Speech Hypocrisy

NPR Forgets Important Facts Regarding Michael Brown

NPR reports the "News."

Grok Offers this description of an excellent documentary I viewed: "What Killed Michael Brown?" Well worth watching:

What Killed Michael Brown? (2020), written and narrated by Shelby Steele and directed by his son, Eli Steele. Below is an overview based on available information:

Overview

What Killed Michael Brown? is a 1-hour, 49-minute documentary that explores the 2014 shooting of Michael Brown, an 18-year-old Black man, by white police officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri. The incident sparked nationwide protests and became a pivotal moment for the Black Lives Matter movement. The film challenges mainstream narratives about the event, particularly the "hands up, don’t shoot" slogan, which it argues is a "poetic truth" not grounded in evidence. Instead, it presents a perspective rooted in Shelby Steele’s conservative viewpoint, emphasizing personal responsibility and questioning systemic racism as the sole explanation for Brown’s death. Key Details

* Director: Eli Steele

* Writer/Narrator: Shelby Steele, a Hoover Institution fellow and noted conservative author who argues that systemic racism is more a strategy than a truth.

[More . . . ]

Continue ReadingNPR Forgets Important Facts Regarding Michael Brown

Douglas Murray’s Insists that Regular Folks Should Shut the Fuck Up and Leave Commentary to “Experts” who have “Standards.” Jimmy Dore Responds

Douglas Murray, who tanked on Rogan, wants "standards" and complete reliance on "experts." Jimmy Dore reviews the track record of the expert class and their legacy media stenographers. I largely agree with Dore. The legacy media has almost zero credibility and the proof is in their track record. Those who still trust legacy media are infected with a mind virus. Murray claims he is for words he has sanitized: "Standards" and "experts." When Dave Smith drilled down on what Murray meant, it was clear that Murray wants the same thing the censorship-industrial complex wants: obedience by you and me and censorship for those who disagree with Murray.  Dore:

New York Post Article by Douglas Murray: 'Douglas Murray, so called Israel Hamas-Ukraine war expert's spew false info on Joe Rogan's podcast. There has to be a standard.' There is no standard in journalism. How about you start with the standard for journalism? Journalism got everything wrong about COVID. They got everything wrong about Russiagate. They get everything wrong about the Iraq War, the Libyan war, the Afghanistan War and the Ukraine war. They still won't tell people how it started and why. They've got everything wrong. They got the biggest story of their life wrong: COVID. They got ivermectin wrong. They got the vaccine transmission and contraction wrong. They got where the virus came from, who funded the virus. They got everything wrong. They got lockdowns wrong. They got masks wrong. There wasn't a thing they didn't get wrong. You know who got it right? Joe Rogan's Show. You know who got Russiagate right? This show.

You don't have to be an expert to know when someone's lying. To know when the war machine is lying, all I had to do is use my common sense. This is the establishment media and the Zionists losing. This is the Neocons losing the argument and so they want to shut people up by saying, "You don't get a right to say anything. We have to impose some standards." There's no standards when it comes to the establishment, corporate journalism. There's zero standards. They lie as they breathe. There isn't a thing they haven't lied about about, about COVID. There isn't a thing they didn't lie about, about Russiagate. There isn't a thing they didn't lie about January 6. There isn't a thing they haven't lied about when it comes to Ukraine war, Iraq War, the Libyan war, the Syrian war. The Afghanistan war was 20 years of straight lies as the Afghan Papers reveal. This idea that the corporate media has some sort of standards is a lie.

Dore aligned himself with Democrats until recent years, supporting Bernie Sanders in 2016 and 202. So did I (I canvassed for Sanders). Also voicing support for democrats until it went over the cliff on ideology/war/censorship/shitting on the middle class: Elon Musk, Tulsi Gabbard, RFK, Jr. , Joe Rogan, Kyrsten Sinema.

Here is the Rogan Podcast featuring Douglas Murray and Dave Smith. Watch it and make up your own mind, of course. But here, in my opinion, are two examples of  Murray arguing in bad faith. Murray is a guy who pontificates on anything and everything based on his English Degree. He gets almost all of his information from armchair adventures, just like you and me and most everyone else.

Continue ReadingDouglas Murray’s Insists that Regular Folks Should Shut the Fuck Up and Leave Commentary to “Experts” who have “Standards.” Jimmy Dore Responds