On Tuesday, Judicial Watch, a government transparency watchdog group, announced it had dug up data that indicates social media giants were pressured by California authorities to censor election-related posts. 

In a press release on April 27, the watchdog group reviewed that it had in hand 540 pages and an additional four pages of documents extracted from the office of the Secretary of State of California. These were the results of the group’s request for the California Public Records Act (CPRA) filed in December last year. 

The materials point to the Office of Election Cybersecurity in the California Secretary of State’s office, which monitors, tracks, and classifies posts it considers sensitive and stores them in its internal database. The agency profoundly influences big Tech’s censorship criteria. 

“We don’t take down posts. That is not our role to play,” stated senior public information officer for Office of Election Cybersecurity, Jenna Dresner. However, while the office itself may not directly mute Americans’ voices, it would contact Big Tech companies to report on “misinformation” posts and the giants would handle the tough actions. 

“We alert potential sources of misinformation to the social media companies and we let them make that call based on community standards they created,” Dresner said. 

Along with the categories that Californian authorities orchestrated to control information on social media, a “Misinformation Daily Briefing” was provided by outside consultant Zeke Sandoval of the SKDK. This company has a close relationship with Biden, the conservative group disclosed. 

Additionally, the office also followed the “Misinformation Tracking Sheet,” which lists topics that social media platforms should censor that extend to 30 pages. 

There were 31 times in different situations that the Office of Election Cybersecurity requested the removal of posts, in which 21 cases the Big Tech giants complied, said Dresner.

How would online posts be considered “misinformation” and get deleted? The documents conveyed that the targets of censorship were most likely related to the November presidential election. 

According to the document, Californian officials had labeled a video by Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton “misinformation.” They contacted Youtube on Sept. 25, 2020, to have it removed when it was uploaded on the platform. 

“We wanted to flag this YouTube video because it misleads community members about elections or other civic processes and misrepresents the safety and security of mail-in ballots,” the request read. 

It was taken down on Sept. 27, 2020, three days after Youtube received the request. Unlike the office’s allegations, the video by Judicial Watch was giving information on the potential loopholes for result manipulation that mail-in ballots would facilitate. 

In an email sent by the Secretary of State’s Office to Facebook over a 15-minute call discussion, it included a part where Facebook would directly work with “electoral authorities in every state,” who would “report instances of voter suppression on Facebook directly to our team, so [Facebook] can look at them quickly and remove them from the site.”

“Voter suppression” is a leftist term used to attack the election fraud allegations of former President Trump and his supporters. Multiple proofs of fraud were found, yet Biden was declared winner of the November election.