Last week, when I interviewed Doug Smith, he said, “Big tech is a chameleon. They own both sides… they have the government they bought and paid for.” He went on to provide examples and elaborate on the fact that originally chat interfaces were coded in a left leaning way, now they are more favorable to the right than they once were.
Listen to the interview on Spotify HERE
Doug’s statement immediately brought me back to January 2025 and the “brave” (according to Benny Johnson) moment Mark Zuckerberg had, suddenly championing freedom of speech tickling the ears of conservatives after years of blatant censorship. This, all taking place just days after the inauguration of Donald Trump. For anyone who pays attention and is intellectually honest, the timing was no coincidence.
Big Tech is a Chameleon
At the time, I called out Zuckerberg for simply playing a part and changing policy to align with public opinion of the day, along with the insufferable Benny Johnson who like many conservative commentators, seems to be hand picked to serve the segment of the population that generally will buy anything that is sold by someone who calls their self a conservative (I am really struggling with the million plus follower count “independent” commentators who only get about surface deep and lead their listeners so obviously astray). These tech bros and maybe more-so the big platform conservative’s willingness to give them a pass as long as they are talking like they are on “our side” (whatever that means) is bringing back my fiery side.
Anyways, now that I’ve gotten out some frustration and laid out a little, albeit recent, history… let’s get back to the point. Doug Smith is right, big tech is a chameleon, big tech is selling you something; therefore, we should be a more cautious and our reactions a little less naive.
Data Centers the ‘Unicorn’ Topic
As recent as just a few months ago, all the conversation I saw surrounding data centers was negative… and by all I mean, every single person outside of the very upper echelons of government, tech and the Kevin O’leary’s of the world who are building and benefitting from the scaling of data centers. The general public and most of the podcasting circuit seemed to understand there was, at the very least, something to be cautious about, if not all out oppose. Data centers seemed to be the unicorn topic bringing republicans and democrats together. AI, in general, has had a bit different response. While it goes hand in hand with the data center conversation, people are more divided on whether or not it’s something they are willing to accept.
Lately though, I’ve noticed something new coming onto the scene… and it smells like propaganda. I first noticed it a few months ago, The Daily Wire, Ben Shapiro’s outlet shared an arial image of sweeping farmland with “it’s not worth giving up an inch of this for a data center” inscribed over the field and an overlay headline, “Suspicious Anti-Data Center Campaigns Across America Appear to be Run from Bangladesh.”
*Graphic from The Daily Wire
It Smells Like Propaganda
Then, last week, I saw two separate clips from The Blaze Network, owned by Glenn Beck and Mark Levin, making the rounds on Instagram. The first, from John Doyle about Peter Thiel, the owner of Palantir. In the reel, Doyle claimed that the only people concerned with Palantir, are “leftists” who are only interested because Palantir is explicitly a right wing company with anti-communist views and sympathetic to the right wing’s interests. But what are right wing interests these days? Doyle claims the concern is not about surveillance, data collection and the public private partnership between Palantir and the Federal government because only leftists have a problem with Palantir. Apparently, right wing interests include a surveillance state as long as big daddy government is wearing a red tie with an R beside its name.
The second clip from The Blaze Network that caught my attention was from “Rufo and Lomez.” It started with video of Gretchen Whitmer, the Governor of Michigan, announcing her one year moratorium on data centers followed by conversation between Chirstopher Rufo and Johnathan “Lomez” Keeperman. Both hosts admit, while they are not generally opposed, they are NIMBYs (not in my back yard) about data centers. Lomez then claims that none of “this” is about the eyesore aesthetic point of view. He says, “data centers are now a proxy for concerns about tech and this coming age of AI” and that people who have those concerns might have some “self understanding that it’s largely superstitious.”
Excuse me, what did I just watch? Now, we can debate Whitmer’s rationale for the Michigan moratorium, there is plenty of room for discussion there, but concerns about AI are attributable to superstition? Data centers are a proxy for concerns about tech? Data centers are central to big tech they aren’t an exchange for a separate concern they are central to the concern and additionally they bring a whole set of known (aesthetics, land-use etc.) and unknown (water, energy, waste, obsolescence due to rapid advancements) physical concerns with them. This was such an un-intelligent moment in conversation between two intelligent people purposefully clipped out and shared on social media, one has to wonder, is this planned propaganda? Did someone send a memo down the chain, “this week we need to pump-up big tech with pro AI pro tech executive narratives?”
Less than a week ago Ben Shapiro shared a youtube video that claimed China and Russia are behind “the war on AI Data Centers.” I watched the entire sixteen minute, essentially ad campaign, for AI wondering at the end if he had been paid by big tech, the Trump administration or if he was just on a narrow sighted personal mission (… remember his stance on vaccine mandates during covid? He didn’t see things clearly until he was personally impacted.).
Are We All Falling for Chinese Propaganda?
The premise of the argument surfacing first at The Daily Wire is a simple one: China wants America to fall behind in the race to artificial intelligence dominance; therefore, they are running propaganda campaigns to get Americans themselves to fight against data centers and to be skeptical of AI in general. The first part of Ben Shapiro’s and now other’s argument is probably true. China probably does want us to fall behind and, because of that, maybe the Chinese (and Russians according to his most recent claims) are even running propaganda campaigns against AI and data centers here on American soil. But, is it true that American’s hesitation and/or opposition are only a result of being propagandized?
Emphatically, NO. Many Americans, myself included, hold our own valid concerns about AI and data centers that are not a result of another government conspiring to plant them in our head. I’d go a step further and say regardless of whether the Chinese are planting anti-ai propaganda this recent campaign by conservative commentators actually feels a lot like propaganda itself.
As we consider the prospect of this messaging being planned propaganda, it’s important to note that on July 23 President Donald Trump made a speech regarding the rate payer protection pledge where he calls people who want to shut down AI development “radical left communists” who want to “surrender the AI race to China.”
Conservative Commentators Running their own Propaganda Op?
According to britanica.com “Propaganda is the dissemination of information- facts, arguments, rumors, half-truths, or lies- to influence public opinion. Deliberateness and a relatively heavy emphasis on manipulation distinguish propaganda from casual conversation or the free and easy exchange of ideas”
Does calling everyone who has a concern about Palantir, a “liberal,” and trying to convince you that government surveillance is totally a right wing cause if done by the right people feel like manipulation? Does it feel manipulative to show a video of a politician the hosts know you basically never agree with doing something you might actually agree with: placing a one year moratorium on data centers, then calling the rationale for concern “superstitious?” Does it feel like an out right lie to tell you that the only reason you aren’t sure you can support data centers is because the Chinese government tricked you? Does it seem the whole point of these examples of recent commentary isn’t to spur thought and conversation but only for the purpose of swaying public opinion?
If it feels manipulative or if it reads like a lie and a deliberate one, then chances are it is propaganda designed to change your, not manipulated by the Chinese, mind. These commentators hit on well known conservative pain points. We don’t want to be called left wing, we like facts not feelings (or superstition) and we hate losing to China. These are the right buttons to push to get anyone who considers themselves right leaning on board with whatever you’re selling. People who are more right leaning hear commentary like the afore mentioned pieces and think, “I’m not a leftist, I don’t want to do what China wants and Gretchen Whittmer is a loon… apparently I’m actually pro AI, pro data center and on board with big tech.”
The comment section is evidence of this. One reads, “sometimes I judge things by who opposes them” and another, “if she’s against them, I’m all for them.”
Critical Thinking Isn’t an Opposites Game.
We’ve got to get smarter. Critical thinking isn’t an opposites game. More and more I see that people are more easily swayed by personality than principle and take firm stances on very deep, life altering, culture changing topics like AI use, tech and surveillance with very shallow rationale… and sometimes none at all.
Where did our foundational principles go? How did we get to this point of being verbally boxed in with a title we don’t like being enough to get us to change our mind when we haven’t even heard a single fact about the issue at hand? Propaganda works best on weak minds. Weak minds are the ones that care more about who their neighbor thinks they are, than who they actually are day in and day out. Weak minds can be propagandized even when the goal of the communicator isn’t to propagandize, because those with weak minds tend to desire fitting in. They need to be on a “side”… don’t be weird, don’t say anything that might go against the grain, find your tribe and follow suit – always. It’s the mindset that says, “if someone tells me a belief is right wing, that’s what I’ll believe.”
Something is Wrong with this Picture
Is there a behind the scenes push for networks and individual commentators to speak in a certain way about AI to garner public support? I’m sure there is but from where to whom and at what level, I don’t know. What I do know is, my alarm bells are going off. Something feels very wrong with this picture where suddenly, right wing hosts are gaslighting you into believing, you actually would love AI, the government collecting data on you and a huge buzzing structure being built in your quaint farm community, if only it weren’t for China propagandizing you.
It’s worth asking, is home turf propaganda somehow less concerning or just more palatable than propaganda from abroad?
**A note from the author: Obviously if you are reading this you are on some form of device powered by internet technology, which means you and I can not be “completely” opposed to tech or even data centers… but their quiet existence is no more. The scaling of data centers is striking and one would have to be literally blind to not notice (if you’ve driven by one under construction recently you understand). So, we should not let the longtime existence of internet technology where emails and photos have been stored in “the cloud” and our use of that technology to be used as rationale not to be cautious or concerned with the current ramp up and the potential nefarious uses. Also, people don’t have to be leading with evil intentions in order to be initiating ideas that bring about conditions which make evils possible.**
