This week Mark Zuckerberg I sent a letter to Jim Jordan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. For months, the GOP-led committee has been on a crusade to prove that Meta, through its once-eponymous Facebook app, had committed political sabotage by removing right-wing content. Its investigation has included thousands of documents and interviews with dozens of staffers who have found no challenging evidence. Now, under the pretext of stating his position on the matter, Zuckerberg’s letter is a mea culpa that seems to indicate that there was something to the GOP conspiracy theory.
Specifically, he said that in 2021, the Biden administration asked Meta “to censor some content related to Covid.” Meta removed the posts, a decision Zuckerberg now regrets. He also admitted that removing some content related to Hunter Biden’s laptop was a mistake, something the company did after the FBI warned that the reports could be Russian disinformation.
What caught my attention, besides the simpering tone of the letter, was Zuckerberg’s employ of the word “censor.” For years, the right has used that word to describe what it sees as Facebook’s systematic suppression of conservative posts. Some state attorneys general have even used the trope to argue that the company’s content should be regulated, and Florida and Texas have passed laws that do just that. Facebook has always argued that the First Amendment applies to government suppression, and by definition, its content decisions cannot be characterized as such. Indeed, the Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuits AND blocked the rights.
Now, by using the term to describe the removal of Covid material, Zuckerberg appears to be backtracking. After years of insisting that the social media company’s content decisions, right or wrong, don’t deprive people of their First Amendment rights — and in fact, he said that in making such decisions, the company invocation free speech rights — Zuckerberg is now giving his conservative critics exactly what they wanted.
I asked Meta spokesman Andy Stone whether the company now agrees with the GOP that some of its content-removal decisions could be called “censorship.” Stone said Zuckerberg was referring to the government when he used that term. But he also pointed out Zuckerberg’s confirmation that the final decision to remove posts was Meta’s. (In response to Zuckerberg’s letter, the White House said, “In the face of a deadly pandemic, this administration has encouraged responsible actions to protect public health and safety” and left the final decision up to Facebook.)
Meta can’t have it all. The letter is clear — Zuckerberg said the government pressured Meta to “censor” some Covid-related content. Meta removed that material. So Meta now characterizes some of its actions as censorship. Taking advantage of that, GOP members of the Judiciary Committee quickly tweeted that Zuckerberg had now openly admitted “Facebook censored Americans.”
Stone said Meta still doesn’t consider himself a censor. Is Meta questioning the GOP tweet? Stone wouldn’t comment. It sounds like Meta won’t object, while Republican Party lawmakers and right-wing commentators are bragging that Facebook now admits that it explicitly censored conservatives because it was its policy.
The Meta CEO gave Jordan and the GOP another gift in his letter, tied to his personal philanthropy. Zuckerberg helped Jordan and the GOP during the 2020 election financing non-partisan initiatives to protect people’s right to vote. Republicans criticized Zuckerberg’s actions, claiming they were helping Democrats. Zuckerberg continues to claim that he wasn’t telling people to vote a certain way, just ensuring their freedom to vote. But he wrote to Jordan that he knew some people didn’t believe him. So, apparently to satisfy those misinformed or ill-disposed critics, he’s now vowing not to fund bipartisan voting efforts this election cycle. “My goal is to remain neutral and not play a role one way or another — or even appear to play a role,” he wrote.