China News Service, Beijing, May 28th: ​​False information governance should not be reduced to a political tool

　　Author Yin Jia

　　On May 18, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced the suspension of the previously established “Disinformation Governance Committee.”

The committee was established on April 27 with a stated purpose of "protecting free speech, civil rights, civil liberties and privacy."

However, since its establishment, there have been endless controversies and doubts surrounding this institution in American society, until it was suspended just three weeks after its establishment.

Why is the so-called "Disinformation Governance Committee" that protects freedom and truth "not yet successful"?

　　Relevant U.S. officials have repeatedly defended the responsibilities of the new agency, the False Information Governance Committee.

"The agency's job is not to judge what's true or false, it's going to operate in a nonpartisan and apolitical way," said White House press secretary Psaki at a news conference in early May. U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Mayo Cass also emphasized that the committee specializes in "disinformation that poses a security threat to the homeland."

　　However, the committee has been criticized and questioned by many parties.

Several US Republicans said the move was a demonstration of the Biden administration's crackdown on freedom of speech.

Senior Republican Senator Lindsey Graham said the behavior was frightening and misguided, aimed at thwarting criticism of the government's failed policies.

Some members of the U.S. Congress directly demolished the stage at a congressional hearing, saying that this institution is not credible at all, and directly denounced the U.S. government as the largest disseminator of disinformation in the history of the world.

　　The establishment of the "False Information Governance Committee" also has the characteristics of a distinct political tool.

Although many U.S. government officials continue to explain and clarify the agency's responsibilities, and constantly emphasize that it will not infringe on citizens' privacy and freedom of speech, all parties, especially Republicans, continue to criticize and criticize the agency.

　　According to US media reports, a joint letter from House Republicans pointed out: "The establishment of the 'Disinformation Governance Committee' appears to be an intensified attempt by this Administration to continue to abuse taxpayer funds and the power of the federal government to attack the policy Americans, slandering them as extremists and perpetrators of 'false, false and malicious information'."

　　In fact, this concern is not rootless.

"Information release", as a tool of domestic partisanship in the United States, has long been a habitual method in American political life.

Especially in the election process, by collecting and publishing the scandal information of competitors, exposing the "dark history", influencing public opinion, so as to achieve the purpose of attacking competitors.

There are countless similar examples in the previous elections in the United States.

　　The establishment of the "False Information Governance Committee" reflects the essence of American double standards.

America's double standard of freedom has been seen all over the world.

The so-called false information governance with political overtones this time is also another embodiment of the American double standard: one set for oneself and another set for others, the so-called rules are used if they are suitable, and discarded if they are not.

　　The United States follows the same pattern when dealing with international affairs.

When they need to achieve their goals through public opinion, they use the name of freedom to spread all kinds of information that is beneficial to them, interfere in the affairs of other countries, and attack the governments of other countries.

The so-called freedom is used as a weapon to attack others on the battlefield of public opinion, in order to obtain economic and political interests.

As the "Washington Post" commented: "The so-called freedom of speech in the United States is actually just a political weapon." It is true that in the name of protecting freedom of speech, it is true that public opinion is controlled and used as a tool to serve politics, and it is bound to achieve little. It is inevitable to fail before it even begins.

(Finish)