This week Mark Zuckerberg sent Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) a letter outlining how the Biden administration pressured his company to “censor” free speech on Facebook — specifically misinformation about Covid-19. The letter also made reference to Hunter Biden’s laptop and Zuckerberg’s lack of plans to spend money on the election. This sounds bad. But none of this information is new.
Mark Zuckerberg’s letter about Facebook censorship is not what it seems
This is not a win for free speech. It’s a political grenade.
Adam Clark Estes is a senior technology correspondent at Vox and author of the User Friendly newsletter. He’s spent 15 years covering the intersection of technology, culture, and politics at places like The Atlantic, Gizmodo, and Vice.
It’s interesting that Zuckerberg decided to dive into the free speech snake pit this week. It’s also not surprising that Republicans, who have been on a book-banning spree at schools nationwide, are propping up old facts as if they were new revelations in their ongoing quest to blame Democrats for censorship. It’s election season, and questioning reality is part of the fun.
As we enter the final two months before the election, there are fewer guardrails for misinformation in place on major social media platforms, and writing a letter about the Biden administration and censorship, Zuckerberg seems to be throwing Republicans a political grenade, something that can fire up the base and use to get mad about Democrats. In reality, though, Zuckerberg is probably just trying to keep his company out of more hot water and to continue revamping his own public image.
To understand how Zuckerberg’s letter could do this, it helps to know why he sent it to Rep. Jordan in the first place.
Jordan, chair of the House Judiciary Committee, has singled out the Meta CEO in an ongoing investigation that alleges the Biden administration and tech companies colluded to censor free speech online. Jordan even threatened to hold Zuckerberg in contempt of Congress for ignoring a subpoena for documents. Zuckerberg now seems rather forthcoming.
In his letter, Zuckerberg acknowledges that the Biden administration pressured the company “to censor certain Covid-19 content, including humor and satire” and says that the pressure was “wrong.” Zuckerberg added that his company was “ready to push back if something like this happens again.”
This is not news. The Biden administration did pressure Meta, as well as its competitors, to crack down on Covid-19 misinformation throughout the pandemic. In 2021, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy called it “an urgent threat,” and Biden himself said that misinformation was “killing people,” a statement he later walked back. This pressure was also at the center of a recent Supreme Court case, in which justices ruled in favor of the Biden administration.
We also knew that Meta, then known simply as Facebook, pushed back at efforts to stop the spread of misinformation on its platforms. Not long after Biden’s “killing people” remark, leaked company documents revealed that Facebook knew that vaccine misinformation on its platforms was undermining its own goal of protecting the vaccine rollout and was causing harm. It even studied the broader problem and produced several internal reports on the spread of misinformation, but despite pressure from Congress, Facebook failed to share that research with lawmakers at the time.
We actually learned about the specific kind of pressure the White House put on Facebook a year ago, thanks to documents the company turned over to, you guessed it, Jim Jordan and the House Judiciary Committee.
The Biden administration issued a statement after Zuckerberg’s latest letter became public. It said, in part, “Our position has been clear and consistent: We believe tech companies and other private actors should take into account the effects their actions have on the American people, while making independent choices about the information they present.”
But the Zuckerberg letter didn’t stop with details of the well-known crackdown on Covid misinformation. It also reminds the public of the time, ahead of the 2020 election, the FBI warned social media companies that a New York Post article about Hunter Biden’s laptop could be part of a Russian disinformation campaign. Without mentioning any direct pressure from the government, Zuckerberg says in the letter that his company demoted the laptop story while it conducted a fact-check. He told podcaster Joe Rogan something similar in a 2022 interview, when he mentioned that an FBI disinformation warning contributed to the decision to suppress the story. Twitter also suppressed the laptop story, and its executives denied that there was pressure from Democrats or law enforcement to do so.
Zuckerberg also addresses some donations he made to voting access efforts in the 2020 election through his family’s philanthropic foundation. “My goal is to be neutral and not play a role one way or another — or to even appear to be playing a role,” the billionaire said. “So I don’t plan on making a similar contribution this cycle.” The House Judiciary Committee responded in a tweet, “Mark Zuckerberg also tells the Judiciary Committee that he won’t spend money this election cycle. That’s right, no more Zuck-bucks.” Neither party mentioned that Zuckerberg also declined to make a contribution in the 2022 cycle for the same reasons.
The right is taking a victory lap over this Zuckerberg letter. Others are simply wondering why on earth, on an otherwise quiet week in August, did Zuckerberg even bother to remind us of all of these familiar facts?
One theory comes from Peter Kafka at Business Insider: “Zuckerberg very carefully gave Jordan just enough to claim a political victory — but without getting Meta in any further trouble while it defends itself against a federal antitrust suit.”
To be clear, Congress is not behind the antitrust lawsuit. The case, which dates back to 2021, comes from the FTC and 40 states, which say that Facebook illegally crushed competition when it acquired Instagram and WhatsApp, but it must be top of mind for Zuckerberg. In a landmark antitrust case less than a month ago, a federal judge ruled against Google, and called it a monopoly. So antitrust is almost certainly on Zuckerberg’s mind.
It’s also possible Zuckerberg was just sick of litigating events that happened years ago and wanted to close the loop on something that has caused his company massive levels of grief. Plus, allegations of censorship have been a distraction from his latest big mission: to build artificial general intelligence.
Zuckerberg, according to his new style, is a newly minted member of Gen Z, one who’s future-focused and patriotic in a way. For all we know, dashing off controversial-seeming letters to Congress is part of this revamped image and yet another way of reminding the world that he does not want to be involved in politics again.
Correction, August 28, 10 am ET: A previous version of this story misstated what organization warned social media companies about the spread of a New York Post article about Hunter Biden’s laptop ahead of the 2020 election.
