In a move critics are calling blatant election interference, The New York Times and progressive group Media Matters for America are pushing YouTube to take action against major conservative voices like Ben Shapiro and Tucker Carlson. With Election Day just a week away, the alleged effort seeks to label conservative content as “misinformation” in a bid to suppress opposition to Vice President Kamala Harris.

Shapiro shared screenshots of messages from Nico Grant, a Times reporter, asking him to address accusations that his content contained misinformation. The information came from Media Matters’ analysis of YouTube videos, which labeled certain statements on election procedures as misleading. Shapiro responded, saying that the real aim was to “strong-arm” YouTube into demonetizing conservatives, calling the move “scandalous.”

The New York Times is targeting @benshapiro & @TuckerCarlson for demonetization (& ultimately deplatforming) from YouTube at the request of the left wing organization Media Matters.

Let that sink in.

This is why @elonmusk purchasing Twitter was so important for free speech. pic.twitter.com/6t4bnh8HSX

— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) October 29, 2024

Tucker Carlson also revealed text messages from the same reporter, which contained similar questions about his YouTube content and its monetization. Carlson’s response was pointed, accusing the Times of colluding with “a left-wing hate group” to censor dissenting opinions. Carlson’s post went viral on X, where Elon Musk even chimed in, calling Carlson’s reply a “perfect response.”

Media Matters, a tax-exempt organization with ties to Democratic megadonors, has a long history of targeting conservative media through boycotts and coordinated campaigns. Founded by Clinton ally David Brock, the group has been known to engage in strategies to discredit conservatives, particularly during election cycles.

Many conservatives argue this is yet another example of Big Tech and media giants working together to limit conservative viewpoints. Both Shapiro and Carlson emphasized that their discussions on election practices fall under protected free speech, raising concerns that this effort is a calculated attempt to suppress opposing viewpoints ahead of the election.

The timing of this collaboration has drawn scrutiny, with critics questioning if this is an organized strategy to protect Harris by silencing her critics.