Mark Zuckerberg regrets and repents

Alsumaria News – International… Meta CEO admitted to participating in a censorship scheme on opposing opinions.

Zuckerberg expressed deep regret and remorse for giving in to pressure from the Biden-Harris administration to censor dissenting Americans. “I think the government pressure was wrong, and I’m sorry we weren’t more upfront about it,” he said.

Zuckerberg’s regret was more humiliating than inspiring.

This sudden remorse came only after his company fought for years to hide evidence of its work with the government to censor dissenting views.

He was finally forced to release the documents by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and the House Judiciary Committee.

In my book, The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Outrage , I discuss Facebook’s record as a key player in the anti-free speech coalition between government, corporations, academics, and the media.

In previous testimony before the House Judiciary Committee and other congressional committees, I noted that Zuckerberg continued to refuse to disclose this information after Elon Musk revealed this system in his release of the “Twitter Files.”

Zuckerberg has remained silent as Musk has been viciously attacked by anti-free speech figures in Congress and the media. He was fully aware of his company’s similar behavior but remained silent.

When the White House and the President claimedJoe BidenRepeatedly claiming that Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation, Facebook continued to withhold evidence after coming under pressure to suppress the story before the election.

After the censorship system was recently brought before the Supreme Court in Murthy v. Missouri, and the justices asked for evidence of government coordination and pressure in Murthy, the states showed lower courts that there was government coercion in securing an injunction. The Biden administration denied such pressure, and the court rejected the plaintiffs’ position, blocked an injunction to stop the censorship, and sent the case back to the lower court. Zuckerberg remained silent.

But Facebook has not been silent when it comes to censorship, or “content moderation,” as the company prefers to call it. While Zuckerberg now expresses “regret” for not speaking up sooner, his company has sought to sell censorship to Americans in the past.

In 2021, I wrote about Facebook’s commercial campaign to rally young people to embrace censorship. Facebook presented people like Josh, who says he grew up with the internet, and fellow enthusiasts Chava and Adam as happy, shiny faces for young people eager to moderate content. They were all born in 1996—the sweet spot for censorship by those who saw young people as allies in curbing free speech.

Young people have been taught for years that free speech is harmful and exciting. Zuckerberg and Facebook wanted to tap into this generation to get people to stop fearing censorship and love “content moderation.” It’s time, as Joshua and his friends tell us, to “change” with our computers.

Now, Zuckerberg and Meta want people to know that he has been “pressured” by censorship and that he is truly sorry for his role in silencing dissenting voices. But that’s the manufactured regret that comes with forcing the truth out.

The Facebook files have now exposed the lie of previous claims by the Biden administration and a large number of congressional Democrats who attacked some of us for claiming that we had no evidence of government coordination or pressure, while at the same time opposing any effort to investigate and release such evidence.

Now we have the undeniable evidence: The Biden administration has long demanded the removal of dissenting views on a wide range of topics, and Democrats in Congress have pushed Zuckerberg to expand censorship to areas like climate change denial.

As I wrote in my book, the presidentJoe BidenHe is arguably the most anti-free speech president since John Adams. His administration helped create a censorship system that one federal judge described as “Orwellian.” Vice PresidentKamala HarrisFully supportive of this effort.

Thomas Jefferson defeated John Adams in the only election in 1800 where free speech was a major campaign issue. It should be so again. In my book, I propose a federal law that would prohibit the government from using any federal funds to support efforts to censor, blacklist, or suppress individuals or groups. Harris should say whether she would oppose such a law or support it and dismantle the current oversight apparatus in the federal government.

Alsumaria.tv