Mediaboss Marketing

The National Science Foundation spent millions of taxpayer dollars developing censorship tools powered by artificial intelligence that Big Tech could use to counter misinformation online and advance state-of-the-art misinformation research.

House investigators on the Judiciary Committee and Select Committee on the Weaponization of Government said the NSF awarded nearly $40 million, including $13 million to three universities and a software company, to develop AI tools that could censor information far faster and at a much greater scale than human beings.

The University of Michigan, for instance, was awarded $750,000 from NSF to develop its WiseDex artificial intelligence tool to help Big Tech outsource the responsibility of censorship on social media. University researchers promoted the tool as a way to get people off our backs for how we act on misinfo and do things we know work without backlash.

In an interim staff report released Tuesday by lawmakers on the two panels, investigators say the NSF forged ahead with the project despite evidence it clearly understood its actions amounted to censorship.

Lawmakers say NSF officials tried to hide their actions from the media and to curb negative scrutiny by blacklisting conservative outlets and legal scholar Jonathan Turley, who were all writing about or investigating the foundations funding of the development of social media censorship tools.

Foundation officials intentionally removed videos and hid public information about funding for the program in response to requests from news outlets they disliked. NSF officials also rejected media requests from outlets that produced coverage they deemed negative.

In a Feb. 2, 2023, email to officials at six universities participating in the AI censorship tool program, NSF Program Director Michael Pozmantier warned about groups that want to frame the projects in a negative light.

He told the institutions that NSF is not responding to requests from people who are interested in attacking our programs or your projects. Its best if you also ignore it.

Media outlets shunned by the NSF included The Daily Caller and Just the News, both conservative online news sites that wrote about the project.

The release of the interim report follows new revelations that the Biden White House pressured Amazon to censor books about the COVID-19 vaccine and comes months after court documents revealed White House officials leaned on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and other sites to remove posts and ban users whose content they opposed, even threatening the social media platforms with federal action.

House investigators say the NSF project is potentially more dangerous because of the scale and speed of censorship that artificial intelligence could enable.

AI-driven tools can monitor online speech at a scale that would far outmatch even the largest team of disinformation bureaucrats and researchers, House investigators wrote in the interim report.

The NSF-funded projects threaten to help create a censorship regime that could significantly impede the fundamental First Amendment rights of millions of Americans and potentially do so in a manner that is instantaneous and largely invisible to its victims.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology received $750,000 from NSF for its Search Lit platform and the University of Wisconsin-Madison took $5.75 million in federal funds to develop its CourseCorrect tool.

The foundation paid the nonprofit software company Meedan $5.75 million to build its Co-Insights program that would use AI to combat so-called misinformation. When Meedan applied for the hefty grant, company officials pitched its relationships with WhatsApp, Telegram and Signal as a way to develop a tool that would proactively identify and limit susceptibility to misinformation and pseudoscientific information online. Methods would include open-web crawling and controversy detection identifying possible content for fact-checking.

The team at Meedan boasted to the NSF it was using AI to monitor 750,000 blogs and media articles daily in addition to mining data from major social media platforms, the report said.

The presentation slides used in their pitch, obtained by House lawmakers, provided insight into what the company had determined to be misinformation. It included undermining trust in the mainstream media and cited as an example criticism of the New York Times for ignoring Black-on-Asian hate crimes in its coverage.

The company said it would also monitor and respond to fearmongering and anti-Black narratives, glorifying vigilantism and weakening political participation.

Scott Hale, director of research at Meedan, wrote to Mr. Pozmantier at NSF in November 2022 and expounded on his dream world for an even larger AI censorship network that could have full access to all of the data social media platforms had removed from their sites. The data enclave, Mr. Hale said, could be used by researchers to run code against to produce aggregate analyses and benchmark different automated detection approaches without ever having direct access to the data.

Lawmakers on the two committees said NSF has stonewalled their investigation and only provided roughly 300 pages of requested documents. The panels will weigh legislative solutions, including blocking NSF from funding AI censorship projects.

The technology is poised to expand.

Lawmakers pointed out that Meedan officials, in their presentation to NSF, determined the content moderation solutions market in 2022 was $10 billion.

The Washington Times reached out to NSF, but did not immediately receive a response.

See more here:
National Science Foundation spent millions on AI censorship tools to quash 'misinformation' - Washington Times

The Supreme Court and the Battle Against Covid Misinformation

The Supreme Court is currently deliberating on a pivotal case that revolves around the governments influence on social media censorship of Covid-19 misinformation. This case presents a unique intersection of public health and First Amendment rights, a balancing act that has significant implications for the future of social media regulation and free speech in the United States.

At the heart of the case is the governments request to tech giants to moderate Covid-19 misinformation. This led to a law enacted by the California Governor that barred medical professionals from spreading misinformation. However, a federal appeals court has issued a temporary order barring the federal government from contacting social media platforms, pending Supreme Court review.

The ongoing debate presents two different perspectives. From a public health viewpoint, misinformation is seen as a threat to effective pandemic management. On the other hand, proponents of free speech argue that government involvement may infringe upon constitutional rights.

Its not the first time that the government has been accused of overstepping its bounds in the name of public health. It was reported that the Biden administration pressured Amazon to censor books related to COVID-19 vaccines in early 2021, citing concerns of propaganda and misinformation. Amazon initially resisted but eventually yielded to pressure from the White House. This incident has added fuel to the lawsuit alleging that the Biden administration colluded with social media companies to suppress freedom of speech related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 misinformation, spread through social media, mass media, and other platforms, has had a profound impact on public health. Conspiracy theories have been propagated on preprint servers, and politicians and public figures have played a role in promoting false information. News organizations have also been implicated in the spread of misinformation, highlighting potential political motives behind the propagation of false COVID-19 information.

Such misinformation not only undermines public trust in health institutions but also hampers the global response to the pandemic. Effective management of the pandemic heavily relies on the publics compliance with health measures, which misinformation can significantly undermine.

While the Supreme Courts decision is eagerly awaited, its evident that the issue of misinformation extends beyond just legal deliberations. The rise of AI-generated disinformation, for instance, poses an entirely new set of challenges. Deepfake videos and audio used to spread disinformation during elections have raised alarm bells, underscoring the need for robust interventions.

Experts have suggested developing watermarking and detection tools, prebunking interventions, and robust monitoring regimes to counter the impact of AI-generated disinformation. However, the implementation and success of such interventions heavily depend on the legal backdrop that the Supreme Courts decision will shape. The outcome of this case will indeed shape the future of public health, free speech, and social media regulation in the United States.

See the rest here:
Supreme Court Deliberates on Government's Influence on Covid Misinformation - Health News - Medriva

Immediately after taking office, the Biden administration pressured Amazon tonot promote books that doubted the efficacy or safety of Covid-19 vaccinesin early 2021.

The White House was concerned about books that contained propaganda or misinformation, according to Amazon company emails that were released by Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, chair of the House Judiciary Committee and Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government via subpoena.

On Monday, Jordan released THE AMAZON FILES on X/Twitter. They feature Andrew Slavic, the former Biden senior advisor for Covid-19, writing to the worlds largest seller of books that he found some of the books to be concerning.

Who can we talk to about the high levels of propaganda and misinformation and disinformation of [sic] Amazon? wrote Slavitt to Amazon on March 2, 2021. Later in the same day, he pestered the company: If you search for vaccines under books, I see what comes up. I havent looked beyond that but if thats whats on the surface, its concerning.

An Amazon thread of emails shows that the company would then covertly take action.

We will not be doing a manual intervention today, says one email between Amazon executives. The team/PR feels very strongly that it is too visible, and will further compound the Harry/Sally narrative (which is getting the Fox News treatment today apparently), and wont fix the problem long-term because of customer behavior associates.

One Amazon official noted that another employee was given very direct guidance to the teams to be boring and not do anything that is visible and will draw more attention.

What Amazon did at the behest of the White House was to hide books, not promote books, and redirect customers to other books, or to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention when they entered keywords in the search box.

Read THE AMAZON FILES at this link.

View post:
Biden White House pressured Amazon to censor books that countered Covid government party line - Must Read Alaska

FROM FLORIDA SCHOOLS, ONE WOMAN IS HOPING TO DRAW ATTENTION TO THE HARMS OF CENSORSHIP. WESH VOLUSIA COUNTY REPORTER PAMELA COHEN CAUGHT UP WITH THE OWNER OF A DELAND BOOK SHOP WHO SET UP A PERMANENT DISPLAY SHOWING FACING THOSE BANNED BOOKS. STORY A TRUE STORY OF. ONCE YOU WALK THROUGH THE DOORS OF FAMILY BOOK SHOP IN DELAND, YOULL FIND THIS DISPLAY A BOOKSHELF DRESSED WITH YELLOW CAUTION TAPE AND A SIGN THAT SAYS BANNED BOOKS. WE HAVE DONE THIS FOR YEARS AND YEARS TO JUST TO LET PEOPLE KNOW WHATS OUT THERE EVERY YEAR AT THE END OF SEPTEMBER, KAREN JOHNSON SETS UP THIS DISPLAY FOR BANNED BOOK WEEK, AND ITS ONLY UP FOR SEVEN DAYS. THIS YEAR, SHE DECIDED TO KEEP IT UP PERMANENTLY. THIS YEAR ITS GOTTEN A LOT MORE CONTROVERSIAL, SO WE DECIDED TO KEEP THE BANNED BOOKS DISPLAY UP ALL YEAR BECAUSE IT BRINGS IN A LOT OF PEOPLE AND A LOT OF PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW ABOUT IT. THIS ALL COMES AFTER A WAVE OF BOOK CHALLENGES IN FLORIDA SCHOOLS. HER DISPLAY SHOWCASES BANNED BOOKS ACROSS U.S. PUBLIC LIBRARIES AND SCHOOLS. EACH TITLE HAS A POST-IT NOTE EXPLAINING WHY IT WAS TAKEN OFF THE SHELF, AND MOST OF THE TIME WHEN SOMEONE COMES THROUGH THEIR DOORS, THEY GET THE SAME REACTION. OH MY GOSH, I READ THAT IN SCHOOL. I CANT UNDERSTAND WHY IT WOULD BE THAT WAY OR THIS IS A GOOD BOOK. I DONT UNDERSTAND WHAT IT WOULD BE CONTROVERSIAL ABOUT IT. SO YEAH, SO IT GETS PEOPLE THINKING. AND SINCE PUTTING UP THIS SECTION, BOOKS LIKE AND TANGO MAKES THREE HAVE BEEN SELLING RATHER QUICKLY IN THE LAST THREE MONTHS. THEYVE SOLD ABOUT 12 COPIES OF THIS BOOK. WHEN IN PREVIOUS YEARS THEYVE ONLY SOLD 1 OR 2. ALL THE BANNED BOOKS ARE GETTING MUCH MORE ATTENTION THAN THEY DID BEFORE. JOHNSON WILL CONTINUE TO MAKE SURE HER CUSTOMERS HAVE OPTIONS. YOU KNOW, MAYBE WHAT YOU LIKE ISNT WHAT SOMEBODY ELSE LIKES OR VICE VERSA. SO YOU KNOW, IT ISNT FOR US TO SAY ITS FOR US TO PROVIDE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO FIND WHAT YOU

Florida bookshop owner aims to draw attention to harms of censorship with 'Banned Books' display

Updated: 7:00 PM EST Feb 2, 2024

Once you walk through the doors of Family Book Shop in DeLand, you'll find a display dressed with yellow caution tape and a sign that reads "Banned Books.""We have done this for years and years just to let people know what's out there," said Kaaren Johnson, Family Book shop owner. Every year, at the end of September, Johnson sets up a display for Banned Book Week, and it's usually only up for seven days.This year, she decided to keep it up permanently."It's gotten a lot more controversial," she said. "So, we decided to keep the banned books displayed all year because it brings in a lot of people. A lot of people want to know about it."This all comes after a wave of book challenges in Florida schools. Johnson's display showcases books banned across U.S. schools and public libraries.Each title has a post-it note explaining why it was taken off the shelf. Most of the time when someone comes through their doors, they all have a similar reaction."'Oh, my gosh, I read that in school,'" Johnson said. "'I can't understand why it would be that way.' Or, 'This is a good book. I don't understand what it would be controversial.' It gets people thinking."Since putting up the section, books like "And Tango Makes Three" have been selling quicker than usual.In the last three months, they sold about 12 copies of the book, when in the last years, they were lucky to even sell one or two. All the banned books are getting much more attention than they did before.Johnson will continue to make sure her customers have options."You know, maybe what you like is and what somebody else likes or vice versa," she said. "So, you know, it isn't for us to say, it's for us to provide you the opportunity to find what you want."Top headlines: Officials: 3 dead after plane crashes into Florida mobile home parkFlorida Highway Patrol says trooper killed in crash while in the line of duty Sheriff: Violent Marion County crash involving stolen deputy vehicle kills 3, injures 1

Once you walk through the doors of Family Book Shop in DeLand, you'll find a display dressed with yellow caution tape and a sign that reads "Banned Books."

"We have done this for years and years just to let people know what's out there," said Kaaren Johnson, Family Book shop owner.

Every year, at the end of September, Johnson sets up a display for Banned Book Week, and it's usually only up for seven days.

This year, she decided to keep it up permanently.

"It's gotten a lot more controversial," she said. "So, we decided to keep the banned books displayed all year because it brings in a lot of people. A lot of people want to know about it."

This all comes after a wave of book challenges in Florida schools. Johnson's display showcases books banned across U.S. schools and public libraries.

Each title has a post-it note explaining why it was taken off the shelf.

Most of the time when someone comes through their doors, they all have a similar reaction.

"'Oh, my gosh, I read that in school,'" Johnson said. "'I can't understand why it would be that way.' Or, 'This is a good book. I don't understand what it would be controversial.' It gets people thinking."

Since putting up the section, books like "And Tango Makes Three" have been selling quicker than usual.

In the last three months, they sold about 12 copies of the book, when in the last years, they were lucky to even sell one or two.

All the banned books are getting much more attention than they did before.

Johnson will continue to make sure her customers have options.

"You know, maybe what you like is and what somebody else likes or vice versa," she said. "So, you know, it isn't for us to say, it's for us to provide you the opportunity to find what you want."

Top headlines:

View original post here:
Family Book Shop: DeLand bookstore displays banned books - WESH 2 Orlando

If KOSAs supporters are trying to distance the bill from harm to queer and trans youth, having NCOSE leadership be part of a panel at the Heritage Foundation following Wednesdays Senate Judiciary hearing was an odd choice. In a way, NCOSE fits right in at Heritage: Its senior legal team is drawn from the ranks of Alliance Defending Freedom veterans, a Christian-right legal organization that often partners with Heritage, such as on Project 2025, its plan to (among other things) roll back LGBTQ rights on day one of a presumed Trump presidency. Tech companies arent just protecting the perpetrators of sexual harm, Hawkins said on the panel. They are the perpetrators themselves. Unsuprisingly, given the venue, when speaking about the specifics of such harm, Hawkins failed to mention harm to LGBTQ teens.

But the real tell was this: These tech platforms, Hawkins said, have taken our power and our rights away as parents. Others at the event, like Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares, spoke of the hearing as an inflection point, owing to the whole parental rights movement. Repeatedly, speakers emphasized the idea of KOSA and similar legislation as protecting our childrens innocence. Those are the watchwords of the Christian rights investment in legislating the internet: parents rights and childrens innocence.

Republicans have cannily used online safety as code for keeping anything vaguely queer away from kids. Theyve got Democrats on board, some eagerly. Twitter/X is now joining Snap and Microsoft in supporting KOSA. That means these platforms are happy to ally with anti-LGBTQ groups now to pass the bill, or at least avoid another troublesome hearing. We already know that X is fine with letting white supremacists on their platform again, readying for a return to Trump, perhaps. Given this, their willingness to ally with the Christian-right establishment on a backdoor censorship bill shouldnt be such a surprise.

Read more here:
The GOP Has a Plan for Online Safety. It Involves Censoring LGBTQ Content. - The New Republic