>>18473024
>Matt Taibbi statement to Congress ahead of today's testimony
We learned Twitter, Facebook, Google, and other companies developed a formal system for taking in moderation โrequestsโ from every corner of government: the FBI, DHS, HHS, DOD, the Global Engagement Center at State, even the CIA. For every government agency scanning Twitter, there were perhaps 20 quasi-private entities doing the same, including Stanfordโs Election Integrity Project, Newsguard, the Global Disinformation Index, and others, many taxpayer-funded.
A focus of this fast-growing network is making lists of people whose opinions, beliefs, associations, or sympathies are deemed โmisinformation,โ โdisinformation,โ or โmalinformation.โ The latter term is just a euphemism for โtrue but inconvenient.โ
Undeniably, the making of such lists is a form of digital McCarthyism.
Ordinary Americans are not just being reported to Twitter for โdeamplificationโ or de-platforming, but to firms like PayPal, digital advertisers like Xandr, and crowdfunding sites like GoFundMe. These companies can and do refuse service to law-abiding people and businesses whose only crime is falling afoul of a distant, faceless, unaccountable, algorithmic judge.
As someone who grew up a traditional ACLU liberal, this mechanism for punishment without due process is horrifying.
Another troubling aspect is the role of the press, which should be the peopleโs last line of defense.
But instead of investigating these groups, journalists partnered with them. If Twitter declined to remove an account right away, government agencies and NGOs would call reporters for the New York Times, Washington Post, and other outlets, who in turn would call Twitter demanding to know why action had not been taken.
Effectively, news media became an arm of a state-sponsored thought-policing system.
Some will say, โSo what? Why shouldnโt we eliminate disinformation?โ
To begin with, you canโt have a state-sponsored system targeting โdisinformationโ without striking at the essence of the right to free speech. The two ideas are in direct conflict.
Many of the fears driving what my colleague Michael Shellenberger calls the โCensorship-Industrial Complexโ also inspired the infamous โAlien and Sedition Laws of 1798.โ The latter outlawed โany false, scandalous, and malicious writing against Congress or the president.โ
Here is something that will sound familiar: supporters of that law hundreds of years ago were quick to denounce their critics as sympathizers with a hostile foreign power, at the time France. Alexander Hamilton said Thomas Jefferson and his supporters were โmore Frenchmen than Americans.โ
Jefferson, in vehemently opposing these laws, said democracy cannot survive in a country where power is given to people โwhose suspicions may be the evidence.โ He added:
It would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights: that confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism.
Jeffersonโs ideas still ring true today. In a free society we donโt mandate truth, we arrive at it through discussion and debate. Any group that claims the โconfidenceโ to decide fact and fiction, especially in the name of protecting democracy, is always, itself, the real threat to democracy.
This is why โanti-disinformationโ just doesnโt work. Any experienced journalist knows experts are often initially wrong, and sometimes they even lie. In fact, when elite opinion is too much in sync, this itself can be a red flag.
We just saw this with the Covid lab-leak theory. Many of the institutions weโre now investigating initially labeled the idea that Covid came from a lab โdisinformationโ and conspiracy theory. Now apparently even the FBI takes it seriously.
Itโs not possible to instantly arrive at truth. It is however becoming technologically possible to instantly define and enforce a political consensus online, which I believe is what weโre looking at.
This is a grave threat to people of all political persuasions.
For hundreds of years, the thing thatโs distinguished Americans from all other people around the world is the way we donโt let anyone tell us what to think, certainly not the government.
The First Amendment, and an American population accustomed to the right to speak, is the best defense left against the Censorship-Industrial Complex. If the latter can knock over our first and most important constitutional guarantee, these groups will have no serious opponent left anywhere.
If thereโs anything the Twitter Files show, itโs that weโre in danger of losing this most precious right, without which all other democratic rights are impossible.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear, and I would be happy to answer any questions from the Committee.