The FBI is still reacting to the revelations contained in the Twitter Files. A spokesperson for the federal office called the authors of this “leak”without naming them, “conspiracy theorists” who contribute to “disinformation of the American public”. After denying the content of several documents published on the social network, the FBI accuses them this time of “wanting to discredit the agency”.
In a statement released Wednesday by several media, including the New York Post or Fox Newsthe FBI claims that its correspondence with Twitter “show nothing more than examples of our traditional, long-standing and ongoing engagements with the federal government and the private sector, which involve many companies across multiple sectors and industries.”
“Conspiracy theorists”
The office believes it has provided, “as evidenced by correspondence”, “critical information to the private sector in order to enable them to protect themselves and their customers”, we read. The FBI claims that its “men and (his) women work every day to protect the American public”.
The statement concludes with an accusation against the authors of the revelations contained in the Twitter Files, without naming them. They are thus referred to as “conspiracy theorists” who contribute, alongside “others”, “to misinform the American public for the sole purpose of attempting to discredit the agency”.
????BREAKING: The FBI responds to @elonmusk releasing the Twitter files:
“It is unfortunate that conspiracy theorists and others are feeding the American public misinformation with the sole purpose of attempting to discredit the agency.” pic.twitter.com/U18JYkNptV
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) December 21, 2022
The Twitter Files revealed how the FBI intervened in the moderation of Twitter content. In Part 6, whose revelations were made by journalist Matt Taibbi, the social network’s relationship with the FBI was exposed. The American journalist called Twitter a “subsidiary company” of the federal police and the documents demonstrate the character “hyper-intrusif” of the intelligence service.
According to these documents, which notably represented internal correspondence between the two entities, the FBI “collaborated” with the platform’s previous team to moderate its content and demand the suspension of several accounts.
The FBI, “omnipresent” partner of Twitter
The federal office reacted quickly, explaining that it “regularly engages with private sector entities to provide information specific to subversive, undeclared, covert or criminal activities of identified Malicious Foreign Influencers“. In a statement to Fox Newsa spokesperson for the agency even claimed that “private sector entities”like Twitter, “make independent decisions about what actions, if any, they take on their platforms and for their clients after being notified by the FBI.”
A statement that prompted Matt Taibbi to release additional documents to counter the FBI’s comments and dismiss the claim that the “private sector entities enjoyed independence” in decision making. The internal letters revealed by Taibbi demonstrate the pressure exerted on the moderation team of the social network, sometimes called to account.
The revelations did not stop there. In Part 7, author Michael Shellenberger explained how the bureau discredited information about “affaires” of Joe Biden’s son overseas, “before and after” publication by the New York Post of an article about the scandal related to the contents of his laptop.
This case is the main cause of the Twitter Files, which also highlighted the processes of the previous management to censor users or to justify the suspensions of their accounts, including that of Donald Trump. The new boss of the social network, Elon Musk, wanted to prove that the platform “interfered” in previous presidential elections.
The role played by the FBI in moderating content around the elections had already been mentioned in a third part. Internal documents showed how employees of the social network were trying to define the role played by the FBI and other intelligence agencies in moderating content to justify the decisions to suspend their users.