Zuckerberg: Biden administration pressured Meta to censor

In an August 26 letter to U.S. House judiciary committee chairman Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), the chief of Meta, Mark Zuckerberg, alleged that the Biden administration pressured Meta and its companies, including Facebook, to censor its users, especially during the pandemic.

Zuckerberg professed regrets for bowing to the pressure, and, in the letter, said he had cooperated fully in the committee’s investigation of Biden administration censorship.

“I appreciate the committee’s interest in content moderation on online platforms,” Zuckerberg wrote. “As you are aware, Meta has produced thousands of documents as part of your investigation and made a dozen employees available for transcribed interviews.”

Zuckerberg said the entire process had given him a few takeaways.

“There’s a lot of talk right now around how the U.S. government interacts with companies like Meta, and I want to be clear about our position,” Zuckerberg wrote. “Our platforms are for everyone — we’re about promoting speech and helping people connect in a safe and secure way. As part of this, we regularly hear from governments around the world and others with various concerns around public discourse and public safety.”

In 2021, Zuckerberg wrote, senior officials from the Biden administration, including in the White House, repeatedly pressured his teams — for months — to “censor certain Covid-19 content, including humor and satire.” Zuckerberg said the administration expressed a lot of frustration when his teams did not agree with their assessment of the need to censor.

“Ultimately, it was our decision whether or not to take content down, and we own our decisions, including Covid-19-related changes we made to our enforcement in the wake of this pressure,” he wrote. 

That said, Zuckerberg said he now opposes the government’s actions, and says the government strong arming was out of bounds.

“I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it,” he wrote. “Like I said to our teams at the time, I feel strongly that we should not compromise our content standards due to pressure from any administration in either direction — and we’re ready to push back if something like this happens again.”

Zuckerberg also addressed the FBI’s request for Meta to suppress stories about a potential Russian disinformation operation about the Biden family and Burisma in the lead up to the 2020 election. In other words, the FBI told Meta to deep-six stories about Hunter Biden’s laptop.

“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,” he wrote. “It’s since been made clear that the reporting was not Russian disinformation, and in retrospect, we shouldn’t have demoted the story.”

Zuckerberg said Meta has since changed its policies and processes to make sure such a situation does not happen again, including no longer demoting stories in the United States while waiting for fact-checkers.

Finally, Zuckerberg addressed his massive contributions to local governments to facilitate election administration and voter turnout during the 2020 presidential election — which critics dubbed “Zuckerbucks” and alleged that the money was channeled primarily to Democratic cities, boosting turnout and benefitting Democratic candidates.

In the letter, Zuckerberg insisted that wasn’t true, but that it didn’t matter.

“The idea was to make sure local election jurisdictions across the country had the resources they needed to help people vote safely during a global pandemic,” he wrote. “I made these contributions through the Chan Zuckerberg initiative. They were designed to be nonpartisan — spread across urban, rural and suburban communities. Still, despite the analyses I’ve seen showing otherwise, I know that some people believe this work benefited one party over the other.”

My goal is to be neutral and not play a role one way or another — or to even appear to be playing a role, Zuckerberg wrote: “So I don’t plan on making a similar contribution this cycle.”

After Zuckerberg’s letter was released, the Biden adminstration released a statement to Politico defending its Covid-19 response.

“When confronted with a deadly pandemic, this administration encouraged responsible actions to protect public health and safety,” the statement said. “Our position has been clear and consistent: we believe tech companies and other private actors should take into account the effects their actions have on the American people, while making independent choices about the information they present.”

Berenson v. Biden

Zuckerberg’s allegations against the Biden administration’s alleged censorship activities could still play a role in litigation going on in Berenson v. Biden, in which independent journalist Alex Berenson is suing White House and Pfizer officials for what he alleges is their 2021 conspiracy to make Twitter censor and ban him. 

While not directly related to Twitter’s censorship, Zuckerberg’s allegation that the administration was actively engaged in censorship on Facebook and other Meta platforms could bolster Berenson’s argument that the administration would have been doing so on other platforms as well. Berenson is preparing to file an amended complaint in that action.

In the original complaint, Berenson alleged that through 2021, administration officials and a senior board member at Pfizer, Inc — which Berenson says has made more than $70 billion selling Covid-19 vaccines — worked together to pressure Twitter to suspend Berenson’s account and mute his voice as a leading Covid-19 vaccine skeptic. 

“The White House and the Biden administration did this at the same time government officials promoted their views on the necessity of Covid-19 vaccination on Twitter, effectively blocking Mr. Berenson from commenting on their own statements or making his own,” the complaint alleges.

In August 2021, the complaint continues, after months of public and secret pressure, the administration and Pfizer got what they wanted: Twitter banned Berenson. 

“The censorship harmed both Mr. Berenson and a clearly identifiable class of nearly 100 million Americans whose interests he helped represent — Americans who either had questions about the vaccine or did not want to be forced to take a shot that they feared had been rushed through development and lost its ability to prevent Covid-19 infections within months,” the complaint alleges. “These allegations may sound extraordinary, but the conspirators’ own words, documents from Twitter and the government, and discovery from federal officials in a lawsuit filed by the States of Missouri and Louisiana, detail their efforts.”

Zuckerberg’s letter adds to that pile.

In Berenson’s case, his complaint alleges, White House aides Andy Slavitt “and the other conspirators” did not count on Twitter’s reluctance to suspend Berenson. 

“Their initial pressure campaign failed,” the complaint stated. “After repeated internal reviews, Twitter found that Mr. Berenson had not violated the platform’s rules about Covid-19. During the spring of 2021, Twitter told both the conspirators and Mr. Berenson himself that he had done nothing wrong.”

In July 2021, the complaint alleges that the conspiracy to censor Berenson took on new urgency.

“The Biden administration and Pfizer became aware the mRNA vaccines were losing their efficacy against infection far more quickly than they had expected, raising the likelihood that additional ‘booster’ shots and vaccine mandates would soon be required,” the complaint states. “The White House knew many Americans would dislike those measures, particularly mandates — which President Biden previously said would not be imposed.”

At that point, Berenson alleges, the White House and Pfizer redoubled their efforts to force Twitter to censor him.

“Mr. Slavitt was at the center of the conspiracy,” Berenson alleges. “In June, Mr. Slavitt had left his federal position as senior advisor for the Covid-19 response, but he remained close to White House officials, including then White House chief of staff Ron Klain, as well as public health officials like surgeon general Dr. Vivek Murthy. Mr. Slavitt also had a close relationship with Dr. Gottlieb, who was not merely a senior board member at Pfizer Inc. but the former commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration.”

Slavitt and Gottlieb had authored papers together, Berenson alleges, and Gottlieb was repeatedly a guest on Slavitt’s podcast, which Slavitt broadcast before and after working in the White House. 

“But Mr. Slavitt’s connection to Pfizer did not end there,” the complaint states. “Pfizer was a sponsor of Mr. Slavitt’s podcast, and Mr. Slavitt interviewed Pfizer chief executive officer Albert Bourla on the podcast in late July 2021.”

During that period, Berenson alleges, the conspiracy had both public and private arms. 

“Mr. Slavitt secretly and repeatedly urged Twitter to act against Mr. Berenson,” the complaint  alleges. “Publicly, Mr. Slavitt and the other conspirators generally avoided mentioning Mr. Berenson by name, but they harshly attacked Twitter and other platforms for allowing skepticism about the COVID-19 vaccines, which they labeled ‘misinformation.’”

Richard Moore is the author of “Dark State” and may be reached at richardd3d.substack.com.