n a stunning revelation, a senior Meta engineer has disclosed that anti-Kamala Harris posts on Facebook and Instagram are being systematically demoted without the users’ knowledge. This confession comes via a hidden camera investigation by the O’Keefe Media Group (OMG), further highlighting concerns about Big Tech’s influence on political discourse.
The engineer, Jeevan Gyawali, a Senior Software Engineer at Meta, admitted to an undercover OMG journalist that posts critical of Kamala Harris are being actively suppressed on Meta’s platforms. The most alarming aspect? The users posting this content are never notified that their posts are being shadowbanned or demoted.
Gyawali, during a covertly recorded conversation, explained how Meta’s algorithms automatically demote posts that could harm Kamala Harris or the Democratic Party. He cited an example, saying, “Say your uncle in Ohio said something about Kamala Harris being unfit to be president because she doesn’t have a child, that kind of sh*t is automatically demoted.”
Meta, it seems, has set up an internal system designed to curb political content that doesn’t align with their views. According to Gyawali, this process is carried out without any notification to the users, making it impossible for them to know that their posts are being deliberately suppressed. Users, unaware that their content is being filtered, would simply notice a decrease in engagement—fewer likes, comments, or shares. This tactic is commonly referred to as “shadowbanning.”
Gyawali explained that this content control is managed by Meta’s “Integrity Team,” a group tasked with ensuring the platform aligns with what they consider responsible civic content. Using “civic classifiers,” this team can categorize and demote content that doesn’t meet Meta’s standards, often based on political bias.
In another bombshell, Gyawali revealed the existence of a Special Weapons And Tactics (SWAT) team within Meta. This team, created in April, focuses on potential abuse of the platform, specifically looking at how social media could be misused during elections and other politically charged events.
“There is a SWAT team that’s already set up since April… just to think about all the scenarios of how the platform could be abused,” Gyawali said. This special team is tasked with proactively preventing what Meta considers misinformation or abuse, but critics argue that it could also be a way to silence dissenting voices or suppress content unfavorable to their preferred political narrative.
When pressed about whether Meta is doing its part to protect democracy by fighting disinformation, Gyawali was adamant. “That’s all going to be demoted 100%,” he said, indicating that Meta’s focus is on curbing what it views as harmful or false narratives, though critics question whether this approach is unbiased.
One of the most striking parts of the conversation was Gyawali’s admission that Meta has the power to influence political outcomes, especially during elections. When asked if Meta could sway elections, Gyawali did not hesitate to confirm. “You guys [Meta] have the ability to influence the outcome of the election?” the undercover journalist asked. Gyawali’s response was a simple but shocking, “Yes.”
This admission is significant, as it underscores the incredible power that social media platforms like Meta hold in shaping public opinion and potentially influencing voter behavior. With billions of users worldwide, Facebook and Instagram play a central role in how people consume news, form opinions, and decide on political matters. Shadowbanning and demoting content can have a direct impact on what narratives gain traction and what ideas are silenced.
Perhaps the most concerning admission from Gyawali was his confirmation that Meta CEO and Co-Founder Mark Zuckerberg supports the platform’s political influence. When asked if Zuckerberg backs Meta’s agenda to help the Democratic Party, Gyawali didn’t mince words. “100%,” he answered.
This aligns with previous accusations that Zuckerberg and Meta have shown bias toward Democratic candidates. During the 2020 election, Zuckerberg’s $400 million donations to election administration efforts were scrutinized by conservatives, who argued that the funds disproportionately benefited Democratic strongholds. Gyawali’s comments seem to confirm suspicions that Meta’s internal operations are equally skewed in favor of Democrats, raising ethical concerns about the role of Big Tech in fair elections.
This revelation by a Meta insider comes at a time when there is increasing scrutiny of how social media platforms moderate content, particularly political content. Shadowbanning and content suppression have been contentious issues, with critics accusing platforms like Meta of silencing conservative voices while allowing content favorable to liberal causes to thrive.
The influence of Big Tech on elections is an issue that continues to raise alarm among both politicians and voters. Platforms like Meta have the power to shape the narrative by controlling what content users see and engage with, and Gyawali’s admission only fuels the debate about whether these companies should be held to higher standards of transparency and accountability.
Meta’s ability to demote content, shadowban users, and potentially influence elections without users’ awareness puts them in an extraordinarily powerful position. The question now is whether lawmakers will take steps to regulate these practices before the next election, or if Meta and other platforms will continue to operate with little oversight.
As more details emerge, it’s clear that the role of social media in politics is far more complex and influential than many may have realized.
WATCH:
BREAKING: Senior Meta Engineer Reveals Anti-Kamala Posts Are "Automatically Demoted,” Admits Shadowbanning Tactics
"Say your uncle in Ohio said something about Kamala Harris is unfit to be a president because she doesn't have a child, that kind of sh*t is automatically demoted,”… pic.twitter.com/4DSkvzvKmO
— James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) October 16, 2024
James O’Keefe contacted Jeevan Gyawali to request comment regarding hidden camera footage.
Upon hearing the details, Gyawali responded, “Ah, f*ck!” before quickly hanging up.
WATCH:
James O'Keefe contacted Jeevan Gyawali to request comment regarding hidden camera footage in which Gyawali discusses Meta's censorship practices. Upon hearing the details, Gyawali responded, "Ah, f*ck," before quickly ending the call.
His comment speaks for itself. pic.twitter.com/niqckI258U
— James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) October 16, 2024
