The House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government subpoenaed the National Science Foundation on Tuesday, saying the agency failed to provide details on funding given to misinformation researchers that Republicans say amounted to online censorship.
The NSF “has not produced the highest priority documents,” committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) told Director Sethuraman Panchanathan in a letter, demanding that he provide the committee with all internal records related to online censorship. The subpoena arrived hours after the subcommittee released a report alleging that the NSF was funding research designed to silence Republicans.
“It is necessary for Congress to gauge the extent to which NSF officials have coerced, pressured, worked with, or relied upon social media and other tech companies and third parties to censor speech,” Jordan wrote.
“Moreover, the Committee has documents demonstrating that NSF personnel regularly interacted and communicated with organizations receiving NSF funds, including for projects that focused on combatting alleged misinformation online,” Jordan added. “NSF has yet to produce any records related to these communications or other meetings.”
The subcommittee released a report on Tuesday detailing what it describes as the federal government funding research projects on misinformation and creating artificial-intelligence-powered programs to regulate and control online information. The subcommittee’s report detailed funding provided by the NSF for research into “Trust & Authenticity in Communication Systems.”
Some of the funding went to three universities that used it to design AI-powered tools for combatting misinformation. The University of Wisconsin-Madison and its CourseCorrect tool received $5.75 million. The tool initially was intended to offer guidance on certain forms of misinformation, such as vaccines or the origin of COVID-19. Now, it is used to promote fact-checking concerning food safety. The University of Michigan received $750,000 to develop WiseDex, a program that “harnesses the wisdom of crowds and AI techniques to help flag more posts” that it deems “harmful misinformation.” Finally, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology received $750,000 to develop Search Lit, a series of tools designed to help students recognize misinformation.
Many of these programs are still in developmental stages. WiseDex, for example, failed to get funding for Phase II of its development.
Jordan has painted the projects as discriminatory against Republicans and part of a larger cooperative effort between technology companies, federal agencies, and the academy to limit conservative speech online. The committee’s report included quotes from one of MIT’s researchers, who said in a 2018 study on Searching for Alternative Facts that they were worried about “broad swaths of the public” not being able to “sort truth from fiction online.” The report also included email exchanges in which researchers said they were worried that Republicans and military veterans were more likely to be tricked by misinformation.
“NSF does not engage in censorship and has no role in content policies or regulations,” a spokesperson for thew NSF told the Washington Examiner. “Per statute and guidance from Congress, we have invested in research to help understand communications technologies that allow for things like deep fakes and how people interact with them. By understanding how they operate and are being used, we can provide policymakers the information they need to make informed decisions about regulations and guardrails to protect the public and ensure they can make informed decisions.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Jordan’s report is the latest evidence the committee has released about federal agencies working with Big Tech platforms, such as Facebook and X, to limit speech related to COVID-19 and vaccines.
The Supreme Court is expected to hear oral arguments for Murthy v. Missouri on March 18, a case dealing with whether certain communications between Big Tech companies and federal employees could be considered coercive and a breach of the First Amendment.