Accuracy in Media

On his Wednesday show, popular conservative commentator Steven Crowder investigated several alleged instances of voter fraud, where he sent people to the physical addresses of registered voters in Nevada and Michigan and showed that the addresses do not exist.  

Crowder took to Twitter to promote the show, tweeting: “DOZENS of voter names, addresses, and pictures proving they don’t exist. Period. Today I’m tired of this [s***]. Mass voter fraud is real and I can prove it. 10AM ET. #LwC” 

Twitter immediately locked him out of his account for several hours with no justification given. They’ve also placed a lock on Crowder’s tweet and a “this claim is disputed” flag, despite the fact that so far no one has disputed Crowder’s claims.

YouTube, which hosts full episodes of Crowder’s show, has not censored the video in question or issued any statement that his voter fraud claims are disputed. Yet for some reason, Twitter users cannot comment, like, share, or retweet Crowder’s post. Only quote tweets are permitted.  

According to Twitter’s civic integrity policy, the company “will label or remove false or misleading information intended to undermine public confidence in an election or other civic process. This includes but is not limited to: disputed claims that could undermine faith in the process itself, such as unverified information about election rigging, ballot tampering, vote tallying, or certification of election results.”

Crowder explained on his Thursday show, “I don’t know how physically visiting addresses and posting that they don’t exist with names of people in some cases who are in prison is undermining faith.” If Twitter is claiming that his information is unverified, then Crowder wants to know who’s responsible for verification: “If we go through voter rolls, see if it’s deliverable, and then go visit the physical address and this address isn’t there… Who verifies it?”

While Accuracy in Media cannot independently verify any of the information on the video, Twitter has failed to explain what it is about Crowder’s claim that is disputed. Crowder’s lawyer, Bill Richmond, said that “There was no answer” when he reached out to Twitter to find out what rules were violated.  

If Twitter can offer no explanation for their actions or evidence that Crowder’s claims are disputed, then this appears to be an instance of big tech censoring conservatives simply for posting information that they do not like.  




Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.

Comments

Comments are turned off for this article.