• The Global Engagement Center (GEC), which has been accused of domestic censorship, is shutting down.
• Critics claim the GEC targeted conservative voices under the guise of fighting foreign propaganda.
• The shutdown may be nothing more than a rebranding effort, with its staff and funding reassigned to other State Department offices.
• The rebranding sets a dangerous precedent, allowing continued censorship under a different name.

Conservatives across the nation breathed a sigh of relief when news broke that the Global Engagement Center (GEC), a controversial hub accused of facilitating domestic censorship, would be shut down. For years, the GEC has been under fire for its alleged role in targeting conservative voices under the guise of combating foreign propaganda. However, recent developments suggest that the shutdown may be little more than a rebranding effort, leaving many to question whether the censorship apparatus will continue its mission under a different name.

The GEC, created in 2016, was ostensibly tasked with countering foreign propaganda and disinformation. However, critics argue that its true purpose was far more insidious. The center became infamous for its involvement in efforts like the “Disinformation Dozen,” a list of conservative media outlets targeted for financial deplatforming. Through grants and partnerships with organizations like the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), the GEC effectively weaponized censorship against American citizens, particularly those on the political right.

The announcement of the GEC’s impending closure may have been met with jubilation among conservatives who have long decried its overreach, but the celebration was short-lived. Court filings revealed that while the GEC may cease operations on December 24, its staff and funding will be reassigned to other State Department offices and bureaus. In other words, the same people who have been involved in censoring conservative voices will continue their work, just under a different banner.

The GEC’s domestic censorship agenda

The GEC’s domestic activities have been well-documented. Through partnerships with organizations like the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), the center flagged content for social media platforms, leading to the suppression of constitutionally protected speech. The EIP, led by Stanford University’s Internet Observatory, worked directly with the GEC and the Department of Homeland Security to monitor and censor Americans’ online speech during the 2020 election. This coordinated effort was a blatant violation of the First Amendment, yet the GEC’s involvement was largely shielded from public scrutiny.

One of the most egregious examples of the GEC’s domestic overreach was its aforementioned funding of the GDI, the UK-based group that compiled a list of conservative media outlets for advertisers to boycott. This financial deplatforming effectively silenced a number of right-leaning outlets, depriving them of revenue and stifling their ability to reach audiences. The GEC’s involvement in such activities underscores its role as a domestic censorship hub, not a foreign propaganda fighter.

A dangerous precedent

The GEC’s rebranding sets a dangerous precedent. By dissolving the center while retaining its staff and funding, the State Department is attempting to whitewash its censorship efforts. This move allows the government to continue targeting conservative voices without the public scrutiny that comes with the GEC’s name. It’s a classic example of bureaucratic sleight of hand, where the mission remains the same, but the facade changes.

The GEC’s shutdown is not the end of the censorship regime; the same individuals who have been involved in suppressing free speech will continue their work, just under different titles. This is a troubling development that threatens the First Amendment and the principles of free expression.

The Global Engagement Center’s shutdown is a welcome development, but it’s not the victory conservatives hoped for. By reassigning its staff and funding, the State Department ensures that the censorship apparatus will continue to operate, albeit under a different name. As long as this censorship regime persists, the fight for free speech will remain an uphill battle.

Sources for this article include:

ReclaimTheNet.org

TheGatewayPundit.com

JustTheNews.com