In this episode of The Joe Rogan Experience, Mike Benz explores the origins and evolution of U.S. government involvement in internet censorship and disinformation campaigns. He traces the shift from early advocacy for free online speech to intensifying censorship efforts, driven by concerns over populist narratives and geopolitical interests.
Benz sheds light on the key players and programs behind the censorship agenda, including NGOs, academia, military and intelligence agencies. He also examines the economic motivations at play, such as protecting tech companies and asserting influence over energy resources in regions like Ukraine. Benz's insights provide a perspective on the complex dynamics influencing online speech and narratives.
Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.
According to Mike Benz, the U.S. government initially promoted free speech on the internet to combat state control of media, but shifted towards censorship efforts after the 2014 Ukraine coup and Crimea's breakaway due to concerns about the success of populist anti-U.S. narratives.
The U.S. government significantly expanded censorship infrastructure after Trump's 2016 election victory, seen as a threat to the existing global order. Agencies like DHS and NSA broadened mandates to monitor online speech under countering "disinformation." The proposed DHS Disinformation Governance Board raised alarms about unchecked government censorship.
U.S.-funded NGOs like National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and academic centers develop censorship strategies and technologies. They work with agencies to identify and suppress online narratives deemed threatening.
The Pentagon, CIA, NSA and military contractors fund private firms and academia for censorship work. MITRE developed AI tools to automate removing "disinformation" from social media.
Benz argues U.S. efforts aim to limit Russian influence over European natural gas supplies, driving censorship of pro-Russian narratives. Companies like Burisma in Ukraine with ties to U.S. interests become censorship targets.
The U.S. leverages power to protect tech firms in exchange for censorship cooperation. A revolving door exists between government and private sector roles influencing policy and profits.
1-Page Summary
The U.S. government's stance on internet censorship has evolved significantly from its initial promotion of free speech to a more controlled approach, influenced by geopolitical events and internal political shifts.
Mike Benz explains that the U.S. government's promotion of internet free speech dates back to the post-World War II era, with the establishment of organizations like the United Nations and NATO. This free speech advocacy was part of a broader effort to combat state control over media in other countries, which included CIA efforts like Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, and Radio Liberty. However, the foreign policy establishment, which manages the American Empire, viewed internet censorship as part of the soft power influence game globally, involving entities like the NED censorship network, created by the CIA director.
After the U.S.-supported overthrow of the Ukrainian government in 2014, which Benz refers to as orchestrated by the U.S. and UK, the success of the coup and events like Crimea's referendum to join Russia contributed to the U.S. government's shift in perspective on internet free speech. The Pentagon started funding censorship operations in Central and Eastern Europe starting in 2014. Additionally, the U.S. government invested $5 billion into media institutions in Ukraine to maintain influence and combat disinformation.
The U.S. government's censorship efforts intensified following the 2016 election, as the rise of populism and the election of Donald Trump were perceived as threats to the global order. Agencies like the Department of Homeland Security and the National Security Agency expanded their mandates to monitor and censor online speech under the guise of combating "disinformation." The Global Engagement Center at the State Department, initially established to counter ISIS's influence during the Obama administration, pivoted to address various forms of populism after the election. Benz suggests that right-wing populist movements gaining power through social media posed a threat to the rules-based international order.
The election of Trump ...
The history and timeline of U.S. government involvement in internet censorship and disinformation
Discussions reveal that various programs, agencies, and organizations are shaping the direction of censorship activities, exerting considerable influence on global policy and social media regulation.
Mike Benz identifies key players involved in developing censorship technologies and strategies, emphasizing the coordinated efforts across multiple sectors.
Organizations like the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the Atlantic Council, alongside academic institutions like Arizona State University, receive government funding to establish censorship practices. For instance, NED, founded in 1983 following CIA scandals, operates with a mandate to promote democracy without the direct link to the CIA. NED is involved in various media initiatives across the globe and is considered a driving force in censorship efforts.
Arizona State University's Global Security Initiative, among about 100 major universities, houses centers labeled as "disinformation studies." These centers engage in activities underpinned by large government grants. Such institutional involvement includes the NDI setting up disinformation centers in Brazilian universities and influencing legislation about misinformation.
The stated organizations work in tandem with government agencies to pinpoint and suppress particular narratives on social media. This is executed through various programs, such as the SEPS program, spearheaded in policy by the State Department and with technical work by NED's political branches, the IRI and NDI. Together, they advocate for the suppression of information and the implementation of internet censorship, oftentimes in foreign countries.
Mike Benz and other speaker's commentary linked U.S. military and intelligence agencies to an expansive censorship network.
With funding and guidance provided by agencies like the Pentagon, CIA, and NSA, there's a noted collaboration with ...
The specific programs, agencies, and organizations driving the censorship agenda
The scope of the geopolitical and economic motivations behind the censorship agenda is intricate, with analyses suggesting that energy security, particularly in Eurasia, and corporate interests shape U.S. censorship policy.
In recent discussions, Mike Benz explains how the U.S. State Department and Intelligence Services have been concerned with Russia's energy diplomacy and its soft power in Central and Eastern Europe. This is particularly true with Europe's dependence on Russian natural gas, which could lead to shifts in political and media narratives towards pro-Russian stances. Benz discusses the U.S.'s quest to counter Russia's energy diplomacy to prevent losing influence in the region and Germany, specifically referring to pipelines like Nord Stream One. He highlights the economic challenge the U.S. faces competing with cheap Russian gas.
Benz implies that to counteract this Russian presence, the U.S. has been actively involved in undermining Russian economic and political influence in Europe, using censorship as one of its tools. This is further illustrated by the U.S.'s push for EU member states to sanction Russian gas, thereby crippling Russia’s economy. Companies like Burisma, with significant interests in Ukraine's energy sector, become part of this larger geopolitical game. The strategic importance of energy resources in Ukraine, where entities such as Burisma hold rights for the exploitation of gas, showcases the U.S.'s focus on limiting Russian influence.
Hunter Biden's involvement with Burisma, and statements about performing patriotic duties, alongside the presence of CIA-linked individuals on Burisma's board, such as Cofer Black, highlight the intersection of U.S. geopolitical goals and censorship strategies.
The intersection of Burisma's role and the influence of external powers is explored, revealing a complex relationship between the U.S. government's censorship strategies and its geopolitical interests in the Eurasian region. Benz’s narration points to Burisma becoming a target for broader strategies to curb Russian influence over natural gas supplies and political narratives.
The relationship between U.S. diplomatic strategies and corporate interests is nuanced. Behind censorship efforts, there are examples of the U.S. government protecting the interests of tech companies. These companies, in turn, coop ...
The geopolitical and economic motivations behind the censorship agenda
Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser