COVID views suppressed by Twitter at Biden Administration's request

Journalist David Zweig revealed a new batch of Twitter files this week exposing widespread collusion with the government to control the COVID narrative. In “HOW TWITTER RIGGED THE COVID DEBATE – Zweig details government overreach to Big Tech to suppress viewpoints and data inconsistent with “the science.” “By censoring info that was true but inconvenient to U.S. govt. policy – By discrediting doctors and other experts who disagreed – By suppressing ordinary users, including some sharing the CDC’s *own data*.”

The report went on to outline how the Trump administration and the Biden Administration engaged Big Tech during the COVID pandemic and the contrast between the two couldn’t be brighter.

Trump’s team engaged Big Tech to prevent fear-based runs on grocery stores and panic buying. “At the onset of the pandemic, according to meeting notes, the Trump admin was especially concerned about panic buying. They came looking for “help from the tech companies to combat misinformation” about “runs on grocery stores.” But . . . there were runs on grocery stores.”

The Biden Administration, however, set their sights on suppressing the views of “anti-vaxxers” specifically writer Alex Berenson.

“In the summer of 2021, president Biden said social media companies were “killing people” for allowing vaccine misinformation. Berenson was suspended hours after Biden’s comments, and kicked off the platform the following month.”

According to the files, Lauren Culbertson, Twitter’s Head of U.S. Public Policy, “wrote that the Biden team was “very angry” that Twitter had not been more aggressive in de-platforming multiple accounts. They wanted Twitter to do more.”

The files revealed concern and debate within Twitter around free speech, more so than the government. Though there was debate and concern, in the end, Twitter did suppress the views and speech of those who disagreed with the Biden Administration.

“But Twitter did suppress views—many from doctors and scientific experts—that conflicted with the official positions of the White House. As a result, legitimate findings and questions that would have expanded the public debate went missing.”

Zweig continued, “In my review of internal files, I found countless instances of tweets labeled as “misleading” or taken down entirely, sometimes triggering account suspensions, simply because they veered from CDC guidance or differed from establishment views.”

Tweets labeled as “misleading” by Twitter employees include those of Dr. Martin Kulldorff, an epidemiologist at Harvard Medical School. His tweets and views did not align with those of the CDC and were therefore labeled, as misinformation, and the distribution of the tweets was suppressed.

20. Exhibit A: Dr. Martin Kulldorff, an epidemiologist at Harvard Medical School, tweeted views at odds with US public health authorities and the American left, the political affiliation of nearly the entire staff at Twitter. pic.twitter.com/K3kwQIdzHG

— David Zweig (@davidzweig) December 26, 2022

Kulldorff’s tweets were flagged and action was taken against his account.

21. Internal emails show an “intent to action” by a moderator, saying Kulldorff’s tweet violated the company’s Covid-19 misinformation policy and claimed he shared “false information.” pic.twitter.com/lq9QOP8h27

— David Zweig (@davidzweig) December 26, 2022

In the end, Twitter executives made the decision that any view that differed from the CDC was to be suppressed, according to Zweig, “Twitter made a decision, via the political leanings of senior staff, and govt pressure, that the public health authorities’ approach to the pandemic – prioritizing mitigation over other concerns – was “The Science” . . . Information that challenged that view, such as showing harms of vaccines, or that could be perceived as downplaying the risks of Covid, especially to children, was subject to moderation, and even suppression. No matter whether such views were correct or adopted abroad.”