Tag Archives: censorship

No Real Change Can Come If Speech Is Restricted By Monopolistic Oligarchs, by Caitlin Johnstone

It’s impossible to advocate for change if nobody can hear you. From Caitlin Johnstone at caitlinjohnstone.com:

In a solid new article titled “Facebook and Twitter Cross a Line Far More Dangerous Than What They Censor” on the cross-platform silencing of The New York Post‘s publication of Hunter Biden’s emails, The Intercept‘s Glenn Greenwald writes the following:

That is always how it will work: it is exclusively the voices on the fringes and the margins, the dissidents, those who reside outside of the factions of power who will be subjected to this silencing. Mainstream political and media voices, and the U.S. Government and its allies, will be fully free to spread conspiracy theories and disinformation without ever being subjected to these illusory “rules.”

Censorship power, like the tech giants who now wield it, is an instrument of status quo preservation. The promise of the internet from the start was that it would be a tool of liberation, of egalitarianism, by permitting those without money and power to compete on fair terms in the information war with the most powerful governments and corporations.

But just as is true of allowing the internet to be converted into a tool of coercion and mass surveillance, nothing guts that promise, that potential, like empowering corporate overloads and unaccountable monopolists to regulate and suppress what can be heard.

Continue reading→

France: More Terrorism, More Silence, by Giulio Meotti

The French have terrified themselves into submission. From Giulio Meotti at gatestoneinstitute.org:

  • This brand of extremism has also managed to transform many European citizens into prisoners, people hiding in their own countries, sentenced to death and forced to live in houses unknown even to their friends and families. And we got used to it!
  • “[T]his lack of courage to follow in Charlie‘s footsteps comes at a price, we are losing freedom of speech and an insidious form of self-censorship is gaining ground.” — Flemming Rose, Le Point, September 2, 2020.
  • “To put it simply, freedom of speech is in bad shape around the world. Including in Denmark, France and throughout the West. These are troubled times; people prefer order and security to freedom.” — Flemming Rose, Le Point, August 15, 2020.
On September 25, in Paris, two people were stabbed and seriously wounded outside the former offices of Charlie Hebdo, where 12 of the satirical magazine’s editors and cartoonists were murdered in 2015. Pictured: Firefighters and paramedics evacuate a wounded victim from the site of the attack. (Photo by Alain Jocard/AFP via Getty Images)

On September 25, in Paris, two people were stabbed and seriously wounded outside the former offices of Charlie Hebdo, where 12 of the satirical magazine’s editors and cartoonists were murdered by extremist Muslims in 2015. The suspect, in police custody, is being investigated for terrorism.

The accused murderers in the 2015 attacks are currently on trial in Paris.

Continue reading→

Facebook’s New Terms Of Service Update Sounds A Lot Like Censorship, by Joe Martino

Facebook just turned itself into an enforcement arm of US government censorship. From Joe Maritino at collective-evolution.org:

In Brief
  • The Facts:Facebook users began receiving notifications about updates to FB’s terms of service. The wording has users wondering if this is another move at censorship.
  • Reflect On:Is it clear yet that big tech companies engage in censorship? If they are controlling what content you see, is it important to question why we believe what we believe, and where that information came from?

Many Facebook users have been receiving notifications from Facebook stating that on Oct. 1, 2020, they will be updating their Terms of Service. The new changes will allow Facebook to remove content or restrict access if the company feels it is necessary to avoid legal or regulatory impact.

Desktop and mobile users were receiving notifications that looked like this:

–> Help Support Collective Evolution: Become a member of CETV and get access to exclusive news and courses to help empower you to become an effective changemaker. Click here to join.

Effective October 1, 2020, section 3.2 of our Terms of Service will be updated to include: “We also can remove or restrict access to your content, services or information if we determine that doing so is reasonably necessary to avoid or mitigate adverse legal or regulatory impacts to Facebook.”

Users of social media have been rather critical of the recent updates, feeling that it may lead to more censorship or election meddling from big tech companies. Other users feel this could be a great move to get rid of more fake news.

Before we move on, don’t get me wrong, fake news exists, and is a problem. I have spoken to many other website owners within the independent media community over the years, urging them to take a deeper look at some of the stories they put out and ask whether they are actually true. People can do poor research at times, and they can miss important facts. At other times, some websites seek only to make money and thus they post anything that will get them traffic, even if it’s false.

Continue reading→

The Purge: The Natural Progression Of “Woke” Censorship Is Tyranny, by Brandon Smith

The natural progression is from a little tyranny, like censorship, to full-on tyranny. Give in to the former your asking for the latter. From Brandon Smith at alt-market.com:

As I have noted in the past, in order to be a conservative one has to stick to certain principles. For example, you have to stand against big government and state intrusions into individual lives, you have to support our constitutional framework and defend civil liberties, and you also have to uphold the rights of private property. Websites are indeed private property, as much as a person’s home is private property. There is no such thing as free speech rights in another person’s home, and there is no such thing as free speech rights on a website.

That said, there are some exceptions. When a corporation or a collective of corporations holds a monopoly over a certain form of communication, then legal questions come into play when they try to censor the viewpoints of an entire group of people. Corporations exist due to government sponsored charters; they are creations of government and enjoy certain legal protections through government, such as limited liability and corporate personhood. Corporations are a product of socialism, not free market capitalism; and when they become monopolies, they are subject to regulation and possible demarcation.

Many corporations have also received extensive government bailouts (taxpayer money) and corporate welfare. Google and Facebook, for example rake in billions in state and federal subsidies over the course of a few years.   Google doesn’t even pay for the massive bandwidth it uses.  So, it is not outlandish to suggest that if a company receives the full protection of government from the legal realm to the financial realm then they fall under the category of a public service. If they are allowed to continue to monopolize communication while also being coddled by the government as “too big to fail”, then they become a public menace instead.

Continue reading

Twitter Falsely Labels All Mercola Links as Unsafe, by Joseph Mercola

Google, YouTube and Twitter have set themselves up as medical censors. From Joseph Mercola at lewrockwell.com:

The documentary “Plandemic” by Mikki Willis has raised the ante on internet censorship to a whole new level. Across the board, the film has been banned from social media platforms and hidden by Google. If you do an online search for it, all you find are dozens of pages with articles calling it a hoax, a fraud or the dreaded old “conspiracy theory.”

The film features Judy Mikovits, Ph.D., a cellular and molecular biologist1 whose research showed that many vaccines are contaminated with gammaretroviruses, thanks to the fact that they use viruses grown in contaminated animal cell lines.

A May 27, 2020, article2 in The Jewish Voice, which carries the telling headline, “Washington Post Journalist Advocates Censorship of Controversial Dr. Judy Mikovits Film, as Stunning Censorship Grips World,” notes:

“When The Jewish Voice posted the 20 minute preview of Dr. Judy Mikovitz’ documentary ‘Plandemic’ our website literally crashed for 24 hours straight due to huge traffic … The movie is about vaccines and pandemics and her views on Bill Gates and others. Is the 20-minute preview controversial, absolutely — is this material dangerous? Absolutely not.

Continue reading→

 

Peak Internet — The Censorship Bubble Is About to Burst, by Joseph Mercola

Trying to censor the internet is like trying to stop a flood with a teaspoon. From Joseph Mercola at lewrockwell.com:

Over the past year, I’ve written extensively about the initially creeping — and then sweeping — censorship occurring online. Initially, the censorship vortex was on vaccines. Social media platforms and Google all started suppressing and then outright banning content raising questions about vaccine safety.

I warned everyone that this would eventually spread to other topics that might threaten a corporate bottom line. The only surprise was how quickly that happened. Within months, Google started shadow banning and hiding holistic health sites, including this one, in its search results.

In August 2019, I made the decision to leave Facebook due to its clear censoring of valid and truthful information. One year from the time social media platforms began censoring vaccine information, they all started banning views on COVID-19 treatments that differ from that of the World Health Organization.

Continue reading→

Western Rifle Shooters Association Kicked off WordPress, by Robert Gore

I received word today that Western Rifle Shooters Association was kicked off WordPress, supposedly for violating its Terms of Service. The WRSA is (I’m using the present tense in hopes it will quickly find another platform) one of the best freedom sites on the Internet, a wide open forum for those who reject the mainstream narrative. The WRSA featured just about every article I have written for SLL and had a big impact on our reader numbers. WRSA’s many fans are invited to stop by SLL and read and comment. The guy who runs the WRSA asked me to post the following link:

Concerned American@WRSA
·

POST #1 WRSA REBOOT CYCLE
1955E 2JUN2020

That Would Be Called An “Indicator”

One of the early goals of all Red revolutions is the seizure or destruction of all information distribution outlets.

There is only one truth to the Communist: that day’s party line.

Woe unto those who do not adhere.

The second iteration of the Western Rifle Shooters Association (WRSA) blog, hosted by WordPress, was nuked today.

While it is a loss, it was a deliberate sacrifice of a player to increase situational awareness.

The Reds are on the move.

The prize is the former United States of America.

The Red cares not about race, except to the extent it can and is used to befog the naive about the Party’s real goals.

WRSA was, first and always, a freedom advocacy site.

It was shot out of the saddle today by an arm of the Communist enemy propaganda machine.

Their attack did not kill WRSA.

Nor did it kill a single one of its followers.

The totalitarian bastards really can’t stop the signal.

Take heart, not just in this tiny skirmish but in the overall struggle to save the West, from WRSA’s final masthead:

“This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour, we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.”

― Winston Churchill

Forward.

“Get The Facts”: How Twitter Is Making The Case Against Itself and Free Speech, by Jonathan Turley

“Free speech” and “social media” are fast becoming oxymoronic. From  Jonathan Turley at jonathanturley.org:

Below is my column on the Twitter controversy and censorship of social media.  President Donald Trump has continued to tweet on cracking down on the riots as well as controversy over his tweets on Twitter.  Like former Vice President Joe Biden, he is now calling for the outright elimination of Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act.  While supported by many liberal members and commentators, Twitter continues to build a case against itself — and ultimately free speech on the Internet.

Here is the column:

Free speech, our defining right in the United States, seems to be dangling on social media. Twitter added warnings on tweets from President Trump, marking a major escalation of speech controls on the internet, something that has been demanded by Democrats. While the company clarified that Trump did not violate the rules, it still intervened between him and all his followers to add its own view of the truth on a political controversy.

The action against Trump on his mail voting tweets is the realization of the fear of free speech advocates. People sign up for updates from Trump, not Twitter, but the company decided to force his 80 million followers to view its own position on this issue. Imagine if a telephone company listened for errant political statements on calls to flag its business concerns.

Continue reading→

Welcome To America, by the Zman

America is no longer the land of the free. From the Zman at theburningplatform.com:

Every once in a while, one of the major polling outfits will ask Americans about their views on freedom and liberty. Most Americans think they live in the freest country on earth and they are pretty happy about it. By freedom, people assume it means being able to go about your business as you see fit, holding whatever opinions you like and saying what you like, within the bounds of decency and common courtesy. Most of all, it means the government is not going to harass or torment you.

There was a time when that was true. If you are over the age of forty, you remember when people were free from coercion, regarding civil rights. People in this country were free to live their lives and speak their minds. For people of a certain age, it feels like it was not that long ago when even the most intolerant people would say “I may not agree with your opinions, but I’d fight to the death for your right to say them.” No one says that anymore, as no one believes, especially no one with power.

Continue reading→

Technofascism: Digital Book Burning in a Totalitarian Age, by John W. Whitehead

Totalitarian governments have to virtually stop the flow of information, other than state-approved propaganda of course. From John W. Whitehead at rutherford.org:

“Those who created this country chose freedom. With all of its dangers. And do you know the riskiest part of that choice they made? They actually believed that we could be trusted to make up our own minds in the whirl of differing ideas. That we could be trusted to remain free, even when there were very, very seductive voices—taking advantage of our freedom of speech—who were trying to turn this country into the kind of place where the government could tell you what you can and cannot do.”—Nat Hentoff

We are fast becoming a nation—nay, a world—of book burners.

While on paper, we are technically free to speak—at least according to the U.S. Constitution—in reality, however, we are only as free to speak as the government and its corporate partners such as Facebook, Google or YouTube may allow.

That’s not a whole lot of freedom. Especially if you’re inclined to voice opinions that may be construed as conspiratorial or dangerous.

Take David Icke, for example.

Icke, a popular commentator and author often labeled a conspiracy theorist by his detractors, recently had his Facebook page and YouTube channel (owned by Google) deleted for violating site policies by “spreading coronavirus disinformation.”

The Centre for Countering Digital Hate, which has been vocal about calling for Icke’s de-platforming, is also pushing for the removal of all other sites and individuals who promote Icke’s content in an effort to supposedly “save lives.”

Continue reading