Bill Gates, Pfizer CEO on trial in Dutch court for COVID ‘great reset’ deception
Newly released FOIA documents reveal the Biden-era Surgeon General's office ran a broad, self-aware pressure campaign against social media speech while internally acknowledging it was picking a political fight.
1 / 5In the article
"The Surgeon General wants us to remove true information about side effects," a Meta employee wrote on July 21, 2021.
AI Summary
A Daily Caller News Foundation report by Emily Kopp details newly obtained government documents revealing that U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy's office pursued a broad campaign to pressure social media companies into censoring health and medical information during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Yank Summary
What matters, in Yank’s words, each linked to where the source says it.
Murthy's policy adviser Daniel Tartakovsky wrote in May 2021 that the censorship effort should be framed as covering all health misinformation, not just COVID-related content. In the source
A Meta employee wrote on July 21, 2021, that "the Surgeon General wants us to remove true information about side effects." In the source
"The Surgeon General wants us to remove true information about side effects," a Meta employee wrote on July 21, 2021.
A Meta employee's own words confirm the government demanded removal of factually accurate vaccine side-effect information.
In context
“They’re killing people,” Biden said two days later, on July 16, 2021, bringing the weight of the White House down on companies to restrict speech. In the view of Murthy’s team, censoring social media was not a temporary emergency measure, the documents indicate. It was part and parcel of public health. The government censored memes, jokes and even factual information it did not like. “The Surgeon General wants us to remove true information about side effects,” a Meta employee wrote on July 21, 2021, the congressional investigation showed. The documents show the Biden administration had a “broad” vision for its new censorship tools.
Receipt
Murthy's office internally admitted the misinformation crackdown "politicizes office by further engaging in social media/censorship war."
The Surgeon General's own internal memo concedes the campaign was politically motivated, not purely a public-health mission.
In context
Murthy’s office groused that it could not obtain more user data from Facebook. “FB has insurmountable advantage on data, which means we’ll never know if they are on the level,” the memo states. It proposed “to hold FB and other tech providers accountable with push on more open data.” Murthy’s office internally admitted in the memo that the misinformation crackdown “politicizes office by further engaging in social media/censorship war.” Misinformation While the surgeon general’s office has traditionally focused on providing good health information, Murthy’s office was for at least a two to four week period “unilaterally focused on misinformation” in the lead up to the July 2021 advisory, anot…
Murthy's office internally admitted in the memo that the misinformation crackdown "politicizes office by further engaging in social media/censorship war."
Receipt
Censoring social media was not a temporary emergency measure, the documents indicate — it was part and parcel of public health, extending to memes, jokes, and factual information the government did not like.
The documents reframe the censorship as permanent health-governance policy, not a crisis exception, covering even jokes and facts.
In context
“They’re killing people,” Biden said two days later, on July 16, 2021, bringing the weight of the White House down on companies to restrict speech. In the view of Murthy’s team, censoring social media was not a temporary emergency measure, the documents indicate. It was part and parcel of public health. The government censored memes, jokes and even factual information it did not like. “The Surgeon General wants us to remove true information about side effects,” a Meta employee wrote on July 21, 2021, the congressional investigation showed.
Censoring social media was not a temporary emergency measure, the documents indicate — it was part and parcel of public health, The government censored extending to memes, jokes, and even factual information the government did not like.
Receipt
"Isn't this just a part of cancel culture?" reads a prepared question. "No, it's the opposite actually," Murthy's prepared reply reads.
Murthy's scripted denial that government-directed content removal constitutes cancel culture reveals deliberate messaging strategy.
In context
Murthy’s talking points urged children to wear masks, even if states declined to implement mandates. “Parents, have your kids wear masks,” the talking points read. Murthy’s talking points address the social media censorship. Talking points prepared for a “Stakeholder Q&A” stated that scrubbing the Internet of opinions disfavored by the government represented “the opposite” of cancel culture. “Isn’t this just a part of cancel culture?” reads a question that Murthy prepared for under a headline reading “Tough Q&A.” “No, it’s the opposite actually,” Murthy’s prepared reply reads.
"Isn't this just a part of cancel culture?" reads a question that Murthy prepared for under a headline reading “Tough Q&A.” question. "No, it's the opposite actually," Murthy's prepared reply reads.
Receipt
Murthy's policy adviser wrote in May 2021 that the censorship vision extended beyond COVID to "how social media impacts people, especially young people."
An adviser's memo shows the censorship ambitions were always broader than COVID, targeting social media's effect on youth generally.
In context
“The Surgeon General wants us to remove true information about side effects,” a Meta employee wrote on July 21, 2021, the congressional investigation showed. The documents show the Biden administration had a “broad” vision for its new censorship tools. “May be worth emphasizing that you don’t just see this as a COVID-related issue (i.e., it’s health and medical misinformation, not just COVID-related misinformation),” wrote Murthy’s policy adviser Daniel Tartakovsky in May 2021. “More broadly, it gets at the issue of how social media impacts people, especially young people.” Tartakovsky did not respond to a request for comment.
wrote Murthy's policy adviser Daniel Tartakovsky wrote in May 2021 “More broadly, it gets at that the issue of censorship vision extended beyond COVID to "how social media impacts people, especially young people."
Receipt
Keep going with this source
Create something
Turn this source into a post, a thread or a newsletter, every line checked against it.
See what you can create →A clip on this page
The article embeds these. Each one can be yanked on its own, from the moment it was said.
Ask a question
Ask about anything in this article. We’ll try to provide an answer.