Censorship Crisis EXPOSED: Government and Big Tech Collusion

Close up of a persons mouth covered with tape that reads CENSORED FREEDOM

A secret alliance between government agencies and Big Tech to censor conservative Americans has sparked a constitutional crisis, and Congress is now demanding answers.

Story Snapshot

Sean Davis, CEO of The Federalist, testified that federal agencies coordinated with Big Tech to silence conservative voices during critical events.
Senator Ted Cruz’s committee is investigating alleged violations of First Amendment rights and calling for bipartisan legislative safeguards.
Government “jawboning” and pressure campaigns targeted reporting on COVID-19, the 2020 election, and Black Lives Matter.
Experts warn these tactics erode press freedom and threaten the constitutional foundation of free speech.

Government and Big Tech Coordination: A Direct Assault on Free Speech

Sean Davis, CEO of The Federalist, appeared before the Senate Commerce Committee on October 8, 2025, to deliver testimony that has sent shockwaves through conservative circles. Davis described how the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) allegedly conspired with major technology companies to censor conservative media outlets, including The Federalist itself. According to Davis, this coordination was not only covert but targeted specific reporting around the 2020 election, COVID-19 policies, and nationwide protests, raising grave concerns about the trampling of First Amendment rights.

The alleged censorship campaign extended beyond routine moderation, with government officials reportedly “jawboning” tech platforms like Google, Twitter, and Facebook to suppress content deemed harmful or misleading. Davis cited Google’s attempt to demonetize The Federalist after its critical coverage of government COVID-19 responses and Black Lives Matter protests. Such actions, he argued, were orchestrated in secrecy and disproportionately impacted conservative voices, threatening the very fabric of American press freedom.

Congressional Response and Calls for Legislative Safeguards

Senator Ted Cruz, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, has positioned himself at the forefront of efforts to investigate these allegations. Cruz’s committee convened the hearing titled “Shut Your App: How Uncle Sam Jawboned Big Tech Into Silencing Americans,” where Davis and other witnesses, including legal scholars and journalists, provided testimony on the scope and impact of government-tech collaboration. Cruz asserted that “The First Amendment is the bedrock of this country,” warning that government overreach into content moderation is dangerous and demands robust legislative response.

Recent reports released by the committee detail how CISA allegedly directed and funded censorship campaigns, targeting conservative media during contentious moments in American politics. The investigation has drawn bipartisan interest, but the strongest calls for reform come from conservatives determined to preserve individual liberty and limited government. Proposed legislative safeguards aim to restrict agencies from pressuring private companies to suppress lawful speech, setting a precedent for future administrations and protecting the public square.

Historical Context and Broader Implications for Constitutional Rights

The roots of this controversy stretch back to heightened government involvement in online speech after the 2016 and 2020 elections. Agencies like CISA, initially created to protect critical infrastructure, expanded their remit into election security and misinformation control. The debate intensified as the government’s informal pressure on social media platforms—often described as “jawboning”—raised alarms about unconstitutional censorship. Previous incidents, such as the Twitter Files revelations and state-level laws in Texas and Florida aimed at curbing tech censorship, underscore the ongoing battle over free speech in the digital age.

Expert opinions are divided. Legal scholars like Eugene Volokh argue that any coercion by government actors to silence political speech violates First Amendment protections. Others believe platforms have the right to moderate content but warn that government involvement introduces complex legal and ethical challenges. Policy analysts at the Heritage Foundation caution that unchecked collaboration between government and Big Tech risks sliding into totalitarianism, undermining transparency and public trust.

Press Freedom, Public Trust, and the Path Forward

The consequences of government and Big Tech censorship are far-reaching. In the short term, trust in media and technology platforms erodes, fueling polarization and skepticism among the American public. Long-term, the chilling effect on press freedom and open debate poses a fundamental threat to democratic institutions. Conservative media, journalists, and social media users remain particularly vulnerable, as regulatory costs rise and audiences become more fragmented.

‘It is time to return to a world where we can say what we wish without fear of being censored, or deplatformed, or shot dead’

Davis: The Government And Big Tech Censored Americans. It Must Never Happen Again https://t.co/l01R36rS0c

— Fearless45 (@Fearless45Trump) October 8, 2025

Congressional hearings continue, with lawmakers examining the full extent of government involvement and weighing bipartisan solutions. While some legal interpretations dispute whether “jawboning” constitutes direct censorship, the urgency to clarify constitutional boundaries and shield conservative voices from future suppression is clear. As the investigation unfolds, the core American principles of free speech, individual liberty, and limited government must remain at the center of policy reforms—ensuring that government censorship of Americans never happens again.