đź‘‹ I am disabling input while I build a new version that does not rely on Twitter's $100 / mo API.

Big Tech Partners Collaborate with EIP to Censor Vote-by-Mail Criticism

The Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) has collaborated with its Big Tech partners in order to systematically censor any delegitimization of vote-by-mail as disinformation five months before the 2020 election, sparking controversy among both sides of the political aisle regarding free speech rights online.

A photo depicting two hands holding a ballot box with a computer screen in between them displaying "censored" text

A photo depicting two hands holding a ballot box with a computer screen in between them displaying "censored" text

In a move that has sparked controversy among both sides of the political aisle, the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) has collaborated with its Big Tech partners to systematically censor any delegitimization of vote-by-mail as disinformation. This decision was made five months before the 2020 election and effectively pre-banned criticism of vote-by-mail at the narrative level. The EIP is a consortium of experts from organizations such as The Stanford Internet Observatory, Graphika, and The Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab. Their mission is to “combat malicious actors who are attempting to interfere in elections through digital means” by working closely with social media companies like Facebook and Twitter. It appears that this collaboration has resulted in censoring criticism of vote-by-mail which some view as an attack on free speech rights. Critics argue that this move by the EIP and its Big Tech partners could be seen as siding with one side of the political spectrum over another and could potentially influence how people view voting methods ahead of November’s election. Many have voiced their concerns over what they see as an attempt to control public opinion and stifle dissenting voices. On the other hand, proponents argue that this move was necessary in order to combat potential misinformation campaigns regarding voting methods ahead of November’s election. They point out that it is important for people to be able to make informed decisions when it comes time for them to cast their ballots without being misled or manipulated by malicious actors online. Regardless of where one stands on this issue, it is clear that this decision will have far reaching implications for how we approach free speech rights online moving forward into November’s election and beyond. It remains unclear what kind of impact this will have on public opinion but it certainly raises questions about how much power social media companies should have when it comes to regulating content online.