• Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg revealed that the outgoing Biden administration pressured his company to censor content, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic.
• Zuckerberg emphasized that the government’s actions to pressure private companies to censor content are illegal and unethical, as the First Amendment protects against government censorship but not private entities.
• Despite acknowledging the illegality of the demands, Meta did not challenge the administration in court and even developed a portal for the White House to flag content for removal, drawing criticism from free speech advocates.
• Zuckerberg’s comments suggest a selective approach to censorship resistance, as Meta has a history of censoring similar content and faced backlash for actions like banning President-elect Trump and suppressing the New York Post‘s reporting.
• Zuckerberg vowed policy changes to prevent similar situations in the future, but his past inaction and selective resistance to censorship have raised doubts about Meta’s commitment to free speech and its willingness to challenge government overreach.

In a series of revealing statements, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has publicly acknowledged that the outgoing Biden administration pressured his company to censor content on its platforms, particularly during the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.

During a recent appearance on “The Joe Rogan Experience,” Zuckerberg detailed how the Biden administration aggressively pressured Meta to suppress truthful information, including memes and discussions about COVID-19 vaccine side effects. “Having people in the administration calling up the guys on our team and yelling at them and cursing and threatening repercussions if we don’t take down things that are true is like – it’s pretty bad,” he told Rogan, adding: “I don’t think that the pushing for social media companies to censor stuff was legal.”

Zuckerberg’s comments highlight a troubling dynamic. While the First Amendment prohibits government censorship, private companies like Meta are not bound by the same constitutional constraints. He nevertheless emphasized that the Biden administration’s tactics crossed a line.

“The First Amendment does apply to the government. That’s the whole point. The government is not allowed to censor this stuff,” the Facebook founder continued.

Despite admitting that these demands were illegal and unethical, Zuckerberg and Meta notably refrained from challenging the administration in court, raising questions about the company’s commitment to free speech and its willingness to resist government overreach. The Big Tech firm did not join the Missouri v. Biden lawsuit, which challenged the administration’s coercion of social media companies to suppress certain viewpoints. The case, which later became Murthy v. Missouri, ultimately failed after the Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiffs lacked standing.

Meta’s obedience to censorship demands sparks free speech concerns

Legal experts have suggested that Meta’s participation could have strengthened the case, as the company was a direct recipient of the administration’s censorship demands. But instead of fighting back, Meta reportedly developed a special portal for the White House to flag content for removal, effectively facilitating the suppression of lawful speech. This revelation has drawn sharp criticism from free speech advocates, who argue that Meta’s compliance with the administration’s demands undermined its responsibility to protect open discourse.

Worse, Zuckerberg’s resistance to censorship appears to have been selective. While he recounted a moment when he refused to remove a satirical meme about COVID-19 vaccines, Meta has a history of censoring similar content. The company also faced backlash for banning President-elect Donald Trump and suppressing the New York Post‘s reporting on the Hunter Biden laptop ahead of the 2020 election.

In an August letter to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH), Zuckerberg expressed regret for not resisting the administration’s pressure more forcefully. “I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it,” he wrote at the time. He also admitted that Meta’s decision to demote the Post’s “laptop from hell” story was a mistake, driven by government pressure rather than factual evidence.

Zuckerberg’s comments also shed light on the Biden administration’s aggressive tactics. He described how officials from the Biden White House would “call up our team and scream at them and curse” over content shared on social media. This pressure intensified after outgoing President Joe Biden himself publicly accused social media platforms of spreading harmful misinformation, claiming they were “killing people.”

“All these different agencies and branches of government just started investigating and coming after our company,” the Facebook founder recounted to Rogan. “It was brutal.”

Zuckerberg appears to be positioning Meta as a champion of free speech, but his past actions – or lack thereof – raise questions about the company’s credibility. While he has vowed to implement policy changes to prevent similar situations in the future, his failure to challenge the outgoing Biden administration’s illegal censorship demands has left many skeptical.

Watch this clip of Mark Zuckerberg recounting how the outgoing Biden administration demanded that his company censor internet memes on “The Joe Rogan Experience.”

This video is from the Cynthia’s Pursuit of Truth channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:

Zuckerberg admits Biden admin pressured Meta to CENSOR content.

Zuckerberg claims he ‘regrets’ censoring Americans under ‘pressure’ from Biden-Harris admin.

Zuckerberg admits to censoring Americans, Hunter Biden laptop story under Biden-Harris “pressure.”

Vindication for independent media: Zuckerberg admits fact-checkers were politically biased, embraces free speech.

Sources include:

ReclaimTheNet.org 1

ReclaimTheNet.org 2

YourNews.com

Brighteon.com