Is the Media Colluding with Government to Spy and Propagandize?
It is clear from the 2020 presidential election that the mainstream media in the United States overwhelmingly supported President Biden and that there was a concerted effort to oust President Trump and his alleged authoritarianism (the president could have become a dictator in the age of COVID-19 when everyone was living in fear and used force to overturn the election, but you would not know that he refrained from usurping power by the constant charges thrown his way). In the era where Big Tech dominates our lives, there are many concerns over censorship and government utilizing these companies to spy on individuals. Although many people are content giving up their privacy, should we be concerned that social and news media companies are colluding with government in order to create a nationalistic narrative full of propaganda and add to the monstrous surveillance state? Who funds these companies, and how much is the government utilizing them for its own gain?
If it were not enough that a few billionaires, such as Warren Buffet, Jeff Bezos, and Rupert Murdoch, have large stakes in the mainstream media in the United States, there are six corporations that control 90% of the media that Americans consume. Because of this and the fact that social media networks, such as Facebook and Twitter, consume much of our time and attention, there is very little diversity of thought and ideas. Therefore, the propaganda is everywhere, and what we see is a direct result of these companies’ perspectives. If the government decided to collude with Big Tech on disseminating information, it could propagandize the public without the scrutiny of past totalitarian regimes. Although this may or may not be taking place, it is true that American media has a bias towards the United States government, as almost all media is favorable to war against other countries overall and the expansion of government power, and corporate censorship and propaganda are big issues plaguing the country.
Many of the online service companies do, in fact, work with the government on a variety of projects and surveillance measures, and even just these should be enough to give one chills. For all of the talk about how the large corporations are evil and need to be regulated and stripped of some of their wealth, many of these same people arguing this sure are pushing the concept that private companies can do whatever they want to censor information, since it is their platform (unless the action involves discrimination against select groups within society, of course). Although media companies do have the ability to regulate the content that they permit, it should be made known that the government utilizes these companies to gather intelligence, and perhaps to sway public opinion in a certain direction.
Influencing public opinion may seem farfetched to some, but consider this: Google has been engaged in a counterintelligence operation (called Jigsaw) in order to influence internet users away from websites that are deemed paths to radicalization or cyber-bullying. On the surface, this sounds like a wonderful way to halt terrorism and other forms of dangerous actions, but how influential is the powerful company in directing our everyday thoughts towards certain narratives and away from others? Many people have experienced using search browsers that display different results based on the user and the specific browser.
Then, of course, the CIA works closely with WPP, Cloudera, Google, Twitter, Facebook, and several other companies through its In-Q-Tel program to gather intelligence on social media users. In exchange for taking the government’s money, companies involved share data with agencies (particularly the CIA) that can then be used for intelligence gathering and law enforcement. The government has also worked closely with Google on programs like Keyhole (a business venture that later became Google Earth), Recorded Future (a collusion between Google and In-Q-Tel to predict events through analytics), and transparency reports to remove specific content that the government does not want the public to see (roughly 87% of the requests by government are granted). This collusion is dangerous, and it could be used to create a narrative that works for the government and to gather information that the public does not want it to see.
The collusion between Big Tech and the federal government is nothing new, and even after Edward Snowden revealed much of this in 2013, many Americans seem to have forgotten. PRISM has been utilized as a surveillance tool against Americans since 2007, and it has included Facebook, Skype, AOL, YouTube, and Yahoo. This program has allowed the NSA to access data and monitor the content of online and communication activities by escaping the pesky warrant requirements (FISA warrants are a joke anyways, even when they are required). These companies have voluntarily handed over data on their users and acted as de facto agencies of the federal government. Verizon was a less willing participant in the data-sharing world when it was ordered to hand over the telephone call metadata records of millions of Americans for a three month period in an unconstitutional maneuver that threatened the right to not be unreasonably searched. Nobody’s information is sacred in the twenty-first century, and the collaboration between the government and the large internet companies are a bit concerning.
Amazon has had cloud computing service deals with the CIA since 2013, and Microsoft was awarded the JEDI program (though Amazon continues a legal challenge against the contract) to service the Department of Defense. In our highly integrated world, there is no escape from the surveillance-industrial complex. We should not expect the corporatist state to expire anytime soon, and with it, comes an onslaught of civil liberties violations, corporate influence in the societal narrative, and increased censorship.
Yes, these may be private corporations, but collusion between government and the private sector can be dangerous and lead to loss of freedom of speech and association and privacy. If this corporatist-fascist model gets substantially worse, we may have to consider treating corporations that act in this manner as agencies of the government and apply some fundamental civil liberties to their operations.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
If it were not enough that a few billionaires, such as Warren Buffet, Jeff Bezos, and Rupert Murdoch, have large stakes in the mainstream media in the United States, there are six corporations that control 90% of the media that Americans consume. Because of this and the fact that social media networks, such as Facebook and Twitter, consume much of our time and attention, there is very little diversity of thought and ideas. Therefore, the propaganda is everywhere, and what we see is a direct result of these companies’ perspectives. If the government decided to collude with Big Tech on disseminating information, it could propagandize the public without the scrutiny of past totalitarian regimes. Although this may or may not be taking place, it is true that American media has a bias towards the United States government, as almost all media is favorable to war against other countries overall and the expansion of government power, and corporate censorship and propaganda are big issues plaguing the country.
Many of the online service companies do, in fact, work with the government on a variety of projects and surveillance measures, and even just these should be enough to give one chills. For all of the talk about how the large corporations are evil and need to be regulated and stripped of some of their wealth, many of these same people arguing this sure are pushing the concept that private companies can do whatever they want to censor information, since it is their platform (unless the action involves discrimination against select groups within society, of course). Although media companies do have the ability to regulate the content that they permit, it should be made known that the government utilizes these companies to gather intelligence, and perhaps to sway public opinion in a certain direction.
Influencing public opinion may seem farfetched to some, but consider this: Google has been engaged in a counterintelligence operation (called Jigsaw) in order to influence internet users away from websites that are deemed paths to radicalization or cyber-bullying. On the surface, this sounds like a wonderful way to halt terrorism and other forms of dangerous actions, but how influential is the powerful company in directing our everyday thoughts towards certain narratives and away from others? Many people have experienced using search browsers that display different results based on the user and the specific browser.
Then, of course, the CIA works closely with WPP, Cloudera, Google, Twitter, Facebook, and several other companies through its In-Q-Tel program to gather intelligence on social media users. In exchange for taking the government’s money, companies involved share data with agencies (particularly the CIA) that can then be used for intelligence gathering and law enforcement. The government has also worked closely with Google on programs like Keyhole (a business venture that later became Google Earth), Recorded Future (a collusion between Google and In-Q-Tel to predict events through analytics), and transparency reports to remove specific content that the government does not want the public to see (roughly 87% of the requests by government are granted). This collusion is dangerous, and it could be used to create a narrative that works for the government and to gather information that the public does not want it to see.
The collusion between Big Tech and the federal government is nothing new, and even after Edward Snowden revealed much of this in 2013, many Americans seem to have forgotten. PRISM has been utilized as a surveillance tool against Americans since 2007, and it has included Facebook, Skype, AOL, YouTube, and Yahoo. This program has allowed the NSA to access data and monitor the content of online and communication activities by escaping the pesky warrant requirements (FISA warrants are a joke anyways, even when they are required). These companies have voluntarily handed over data on their users and acted as de facto agencies of the federal government. Verizon was a less willing participant in the data-sharing world when it was ordered to hand over the telephone call metadata records of millions of Americans for a three month period in an unconstitutional maneuver that threatened the right to not be unreasonably searched. Nobody’s information is sacred in the twenty-first century, and the collaboration between the government and the large internet companies are a bit concerning.
Amazon has had cloud computing service deals with the CIA since 2013, and Microsoft was awarded the JEDI program (though Amazon continues a legal challenge against the contract) to service the Department of Defense. In our highly integrated world, there is no escape from the surveillance-industrial complex. We should not expect the corporatist state to expire anytime soon, and with it, comes an onslaught of civil liberties violations, corporate influence in the societal narrative, and increased censorship.
Yes, these may be private corporations, but collusion between government and the private sector can be dangerous and lead to loss of freedom of speech and association and privacy. If this corporatist-fascist model gets substantially worse, we may have to consider treating corporations that act in this manner as agencies of the government and apply some fundamental civil liberties to their operations.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
No comments have been added yet.
