←back to thread

152 points xqcgrek2 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.203s | source
Show context
amanaplanacanal ◴[] No.45043592[source]
I don't see the point. Even if there is organized bias, what can Congress legally do about it?
replies(6): >>45043632 #>>45043636 #>>45043640 #>>45043712 #>>45043747 #>>45044092 #
xpe ◴[] No.45044092[source]
At face value, the letter (from the House Committee on Oversight and Governmental Reform) offers a sensible-sounding top-line explanation:

> The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is investigating the efforts of foreign operations and individuals at academic institutions subsidized by U.S. taxpayer dollars to influence U.S. public opinion.

Based on the track record of the Trump administration, it is unwise to take any of their official letters at face value. This House committee may claim it really wants what is best for American citizens -- and they might actually believe it themselves -- but the dominant motivation has little to do with foreign influence. Rather, I think their primary motivation is to suppress or intimidate dissenters.

If the committee decided that it wanted to systematically investigate foreign influence, that would be a different matter. The differential targeting is quite telling.

About me (in case you want to know my leanings, so you can take them into account): I do not support this letter nor the current administration. That said, I didn't categorically reject the whole idea right away. I read the letter and thought about it. I'm not necessarily opposed to requiring private organizations do certain kinds of foreign actor tracking and reporting, but it has to be done legally and applied fairly.

Finally, I refuse to call this "politics as usual". Yes, sadly, committee investigations are often used as PR stunts. Both parties have done it. What is happening here is orders of magnitude worse to the extent it undermines freedom of speech and attempts to subvert another information source.

[1]: https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/08272...

replies(1): >>45044142 #
bawolff ◴[] No.45044142[source]
>Caveat: I do not support this letter nor the current administration. At face value, the letter (from the House Committee on Oversight and Governmental Reform) offers a sensible-sounding top-line explanation:

>> The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is investigating the efforts of foreign operations and individuals at academic institutions subsidized by U.S. taxpayer dollars to influence U.S. public opinion.

Wikipedia is not subsidized by us tax dollars.

replies(1): >>45044333 #
nemomarx ◴[] No.45044333[source]
"subsidized" modifies institutions there, so what they mean is academics and students edit Wikipedia some times, and they want to claim the right to control what those people say.
replies(1): >>45045304 #
1. bawolff ◴[] No.45045304[source]
Reading the actual request letter made it make more sense. It seems like they are after moderation records related to alleged influence campaigns by foreign states.