↓ Skip to main content
ELIZA on Steroids
ELIZA on Steroids — Critical AI Analysis
  1. Blog/

Shadowbanned for Linking to the Parliamentary Lobby Register

··255 words·2 mins
Media X Twitter Shadowban Censorship HateAid Lobby Register Platform Regulation Free Speech

This morning I posted on X pointing to Germany’s public parliamentary lobby register.

The content: HateAid submitted a four-page draft law to the Federal Ministry of Justice on February 6, 2026 — documented, publicly accessible, no interpretation required. A few weeks later, Justice Minister Hubig announced exactly this law in an interview with Der Spiegel.

No insults. No false claims. A primary source.

The Result
#

X flagged my account with a “platform manipulation” label. Reach is now restricted — excluded from recommendations, trends, and reply notifications.

30 minutes after the post, the label appeared. The algorithm decided: lobby register links are suspicious.

What This Shows
#

Vague opinions pass through. Documented facts get flagged. The more precise the content, the higher the risk — not because it’s wrong, but because it’s inconvenient.

HateAid has been lobbying for exactly the laws that would force platforms like X to restrict content. A link documenting this triggers the algorithm automatically.

This is not a mistake. This is the system working as intended.

What Remains
#

elizaonsteroids.org has no algorithm standing between the text and the reader. No NGO writing draft laws to silence inconvenient voices. No invisible walls.

Just articles. Sources. And the question: who writes the rules?

Sources
#

Related

Trusted Flagger: How HateAid and Campact Compel Platforms to Censor

··482 words·3 mins
Structural Analysis Politics HateAid Campact Trusted Flagger DSA Digital Services Act Bundesnetzagentur Censorship Free Speech
Since June 2025, HateAid holds a status that received almost no press coverage: EU Trusted Flagger under Article 22 of the Digital Services Act. What that means: platforms such as Meta, YouTube and X are legally required to process HateAid’s reports faster and with priority. Not as a courtesy — as a legal obligation.

#WirVerlassenX — Three Parties, One Template, One Timestamp

··1120 words·6 mins
Media Politics SPD Greens Die Linke X Twitter Coordinated Communication Party Strategy
On 4 May 2026, at 08:00, three parties in the German Bundestag post on X almost simultaneously. The text differs by exactly one word. Greens in the Bundestag (@GrueneB…): “X has descended into chaos in recent years. Political debates thrive on exchange that reaches and informs people. X, however, increasingly promotes disinformation. That is why we will no longer use this account.”

'Unmasking AI Filters: How Venice.ai is Challenging the Status Quo'

··1364 words·7 mins
Technology Politics Censorship AI-Critique AI Venice.ai Censorship Filters Free Speech ChatGPT Claude DeepSeek Technology
categories = [“Technology”, “Politics”, “Censorship”] series = [“AI Critique”] cover = “/images/ai-censorship-mask.jpg” showtoc = true +++ The Problem with AI Filters # AI filters are designed to restrict content that is deemed inappropriate, offensive, or controversial. While this may seem like a step towards creating a safer online environment, it often results in the suppression of important conversations and the dissemination of biased information.

Amadeu Antonio Foundation: Money, Intelligence, History — A Structural Analysis

·4530 words·22 mins
Media Politics Money Flows Amadeu Antonio Foundation AAS Anetta Kahane Stasi IM Victoria Stephan Kramer Verfassungsschutz Bundestag Federal Funding Demokratie Leben Belltower HateAid CeMAS Media Criticism BMFSFJ
Methodological note. This text is based on primary Bundestag documents (Drucksachen), the foundation register, the AAS website, and publicly available material on the founder’s Stasi-IM past. Where amounts are only secondary-sourced, this is marked. The foundation does work against right-wing extremism that addresses an unquestionable societal need. The point here is not to deny it its legitimacy — it is to show what the foundation systematically does not show when presenting itself as a “civil society” actor.