Online censorship has been a concern for online communities since the early 2000s but hit its peak when Donald Trump’s Twitter profile was removed in January 2020. How did the land of the free embrace internet censorship? Why doesn’t the First Amendment protect us against this threat? What should we as Christians know about the current landscape and what may be coming?
Background and Development of the Censorship Industry
Much of the following information comes from The Foundation for Freedom Online. The Executive Director, Mike Benz, has made several media appearances on high-profile podcasts, including the Tucker Carlson Network. I strongly recommend listening to this interview, as he gives a much more thorough background and analysis of the censorship complex that has developed.
During the Cold War, the United States State Department and intelligence agencies developed systems of penetrating the Iron Curtain with pro-Western propaganda. A well-known example is the “Radio Free” stations that would pirate the airwaves to broadcast news that the Soviets did not want their subjects to know. With the fall of the USSR and the rise of the internet, these systems of propaganda became more sophisticated.
“Free speech” was a useful tool for the State Department and CIA to infiltrate Eastern Europe and promote Western values. The U.S. developed a network of agencies, NGOs, and other organizations to push their agenda. In the years that followed, these same networks were leveraged to “promote democracy” and “influence” Eastern European elections and policies to be more Western-friendly.
Two notable examples are the “Rose” and “Orange” revolutions in Georgia (2003) and Ukraine (2004-2005). In these two events, mass non-violent protests and calls for new elections by mostly young people captured those nations. Curiously, these color revolutions always seem to happen only after political factions that aren’t fully aligned with Western governments come to power.
Western intelligence agencies were used to using “free speech” as a weapon against the authoritarian and anti-western governments to push for societal and governmental change that favored either U.S. diplomatic or commercial interests.
The Rise of Populism
Since the early 2010’s there has been a rise of populism in Western nations. General dissatisfaction with the status quo and desire for a government that was more responsive to the people’s domestic needs started to gain popularity, especially after the 2008 financial crisis. The two biggest examples are Brexit and the election of Donald Trump. Both of these were a repudiation of the establishment, a rejection of the ruling class’s dominance in foreign and domestic affairs. “Free speech” had been used to thwart the establishment’s plans, not extend them.
After the 2016 U.S. presidential election, where domestic political discourse was heavily influenced by narratives around foreign interference, there was a shift. The same tools and alliances that were used to combat foreign disinformation began to be applied to domestic issues. The perceived impact of misinformation in the election led to a broader application of these censorship tools domestically to prevent what was seen as threats to democracy from within, not just without.
Policies like the EU’s Digital Services Act and similar proposals in the U.S. were seen as extending this control over narratives to domestic spheres under the guise of protecting democratic processes from misinformation. The rationale for these actions evolved from national security against foreign threats to safeguarding democracy against domestic “disinformation”, “misinformation”, or even “mal-information” (true information used in a misleading context). It’s important to realize when they say “democracy” they mean the consensus not of individuals, but the consensus of their institutions.
Mechanisms of Censorship
We are all familiar with Facebook bans or content moderation teams. But how does all this work? Several layers of interaction between government entities, private sector companies, and NGOs all work together to censor.
Organizations like the Atlantic Council, through its Digital Forensic Research Lab, and universities like Stanford, with initiatives like the Stanford Internet Observatory offer policy and training for implementation. They conduct research into misinformation which can be used to justify content moderation. Their findings can influence policy or provide a basis for platforms to act against content.
Also, they offer training to tech companies, governments, and journalists on how to combat disinformation, which indirectly sets standards for what is considered acceptable speech. They often work in conjunction with tech platforms to develop tools, and guidelines, or even directly participate in content moderation decisions. This provides a veneer of independence or expertise to what might otherwise be seen as government censorship.
These also work in conjunction with public policy and legal initiatives. The EU Digital Services Act acts as a way to harmonize censorship across Europe and affects all U.S. tech companies operating in the European UnionInitially, technologies like AI and natural language processing (NLP) were deployed to combat threats like ISIS recruitment online. These tools could analyze text for extremist rhetoric, flag radical content, and understand the context of messages to disrupt terrorist networks. They have been repurposed to monitor and influence domestic political discourse.
AI algorithms can now scan for political speech, flagging it for moderation if it’s deemed to spread misinformation, hate speech, or if it’s seen as undermining democratic processes like elections. NLP can be used to understand the intent behind posts or comments, potentially censoring content based on perceived threats to public order or national security, even if those threats are political dissent rather than terrorism.
How Should Christians Respond?
Christians should immediately recognize the potential danger we face. The second Trump presidency offers a reprieve, but we shouldn’t necessarily expect these dangers to be eliminated with him in office. We should be building and practicing ways to be resilient and resistant now.
The most important thing we can do is concentrate on localism. Building relationships and strong communities with people you are physically local to will reduce the dependency on systems that can be controlled or manipulated.
Your church should be the first community you build a strong bond with, especially if you don’t have immediate family near you. Your church family has a vested interest in each member’s well-being.
You can also prepare by investing in more analog or older technology. Older cars you can work on yourself will be a huge blessing in the future. Anything with a computer chip and access to the internet can and will be used against you. Buy physical books; maybe it’s time to invest in a solid church library.
Beyond localism, we as Christians need to be educated and vocal about opposing the censorship regime of our own and hostile governments around the world. The next president we have may not be so kind as to repay our voting habits with blessings. We have the next four years to make a serious political impact to hedge against the future.
