Tag Archives: Facebook

Facebook Blocking Ron Paul Shows Censorship Is Not About Trump, It’s About Suppressing Dissent, by Matt Agorist

When Facebook cancels the foremost liberty-oriented politician in America and a consistent advocate of peaceful change through the political system, it’s nothing more than an unprincipled display of pure totalitarian muscle. From Matt Agorist at thefreethoughtproject.com:

Dr. Ron Paul who has been a champion of peace and liberty for decades was unceremoniously blocked from his own page on Facebook Monday. Facebook claimed Ron Paul, who has long promoted everyone getting along, civil liberties, police accountability, and ending US wars, was repeatedly going “against our community standards.”

With no explanation other than “repeatedly going against our community standards,” Facebook has blocked me from managing my page. Never have we received notice of violating community standards in the past and nowhere is the offending post identified,” Ron Paul tweeted out Monday afternoon.

This happens to be the exact same notice the Free Thought Project received at the end of last year. We never once got a warning. We never once published anything false, and we always promote peace and liberty. Coincidentally, despite not supporting Trump and calling out his crimes and the deceptive tactics of Qanon for four years, nearly every single person involved with the Free Thought Project received a 30 day ban on Friday as part of the mass purge of Trump supporters on Twitter and Facebook.

Continue reading→

Snowden: Zuckerberg’s Decision To Silence Trump Is “The Turning Point In The Battle For Control Of Digital Speech”, by Tyler Durden

The social media companies are no longer even pretending to hide their unvarnished hostility towards Trump. If they can censor Trump, they can censor anyone. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

Now that Trump has effectively been locked out from social media following yesterday’s decision by Twitter to suspend the president’s account for 12 hours while threatening a permanent suspension if Trump violates the company’s terms of service, a suspension which was then promptly followed by Facebook and Instagram, moments ago Mark Zuckerberg, who had no problem with generating copious traffic and ad revenue on the back of controversial Trump tweets for the past 4 years, announced in a blog post that “the risks of allowing the President to continue to use our service during this period are simply too great” and as a result “we are extending the block we have placed on his Facebook and Instagram accounts indefinitely and for at least the next two weeks until the peaceful transition of power is complete.”

Addressing the unexpected decision to delete several of Trump announcements yesterday, Zuck said that he “removed these statements yesterday because we judged that their effect — and likely their intent — would be to provoke further violence.”

What about the accusations from various corners that it was Facebook’s hypocrisy and “lack of censorship” that enabled yesterday’s events? Here Zuck has a prepared response too:

Over the last several years, we have allowed President Trump to use our platform consistent with our own rules, at times removing content or labeling his posts when they violate our policies. We did this because we believe that the public has a right to the broadest possible access to political speech, even controversial speech. But the current context is now fundamentally different, involving use of our platform to incite violent insurrection against a democratically elected government.

His conclusion: “following the certification of the election results by Congress, the priority for the whole country must now be to ensure that the remaining 13 days and the days after inauguration pass peacefully and in accordance with established democratic norms.”

In short: Trump may have his Facebook accounts once he is out of the White House, but don’t be on it. It also means that as of this moment, the censorship of anyone, anywhere is fair game. As Edward Snowden put it, “Facebook officially silences the President of the United States. For better or worse, this will be remembered as a turning point in the battle for control over digital speech.”

Continue reading→

Big Media: Selling the Narrative and Crushing Dissent for Fun and Profit, by Charles Hugh Smith

The legacy and social media companies and our rulers and betters all swim together in a giant cesspool. From Charles Hugh Smith at oftwominds.com:

The profit-maximizing Big Tech / Big Media Totalitarian regime hasn’t just strangled free speech and civil liberties; it’s also strangled democracy.

The U.S. has entered an extremely dangerous time, and the danger has nothing to do with the Covid virus. Indeed, the danger long preceded the pandemic, which has served to highlight how far down the road to ruin we have come.

The danger we are ill-prepared to deal with is the consolidation of the private-sector media and its unification of content into one Approved Narrative which is for sale to the highest bidders. This is the perfection of for-profit Totalitarianism in which dissent is crushed, dissenters punished and billions of dollars are reaped in managing the data and content flow of the one Approved Narrative.

So don’t post content containing the words (censored), (censored) or (censored), or you’ll be banned, shadow-banned, demonetized, demonized and marginalized. Your voice will be erased from public access via the Big Media platforms and you will effectively be disappeared but without any visible mess or evidence–or recourse in the courts.

That’s the competitive advantage of for-profit Totalitarianism–no legal recourse against the suppression of free speech and dissent. And if you’re shadow-banned as I was, you won’t even know just how severely your free speech has been suppressed because the Big Tech platforms are black boxes: no one outside the profit-maximizing corporation knows what its algorithms and filters actually do or exactly what happens to the disappeared / shadow-banned.

Shadow-banning is an invisible toxin to free speech: if you’re shadow-banned, you won’t even know that the audience for your posts, tweets, etc. has plummeted to near-zero and others can no longer retweet your content. You only see your post is online as usual, because this is the whole point of shadow-banning: you assume your speech is still free even as its been strangled to death by Big Tech black box platforms.

Continue reading→

Facebook Is a Doomsday Machine, by Adrienne LaFrance

I was on Facebook briefly but decided I just wasn’t very interested in my Facebook friends’ pets, diets, exercise routines, grandchildren, or frankly, their lives. The lack of a downvote function was also a disincentive. So I got off with no regrets. I’ve never been on any other social media, but it must have some sort of allure, judging from the millions who are on it. From Adrienne LaFrance at theatlantic.com:

The Doomsday Machine was never supposed to exist. It was meant to be a thought experiment that went like this: Imagine a device built with the sole purpose of destroying all human life. Now suppose that machine is buried deep underground, but connected to a computer, which is in turn hooked up to sensors in cities and towns across the United States.

The sensors are designed to sniff out signs of the impending apocalypse—not to prevent the end of the world, but to complete it. If radiation levels suggest nuclear explosions in, say, three American cities simultaneously, the sensors notify the Doomsday Machine, which is programmed to detonate several nuclear warheads in response. At that point, there is no going back. The fission chain reaction that produces an atomic explosion is initiated enough times over to extinguish all life on Earth. There is a terrible flash of light, a great booming sound, then a sustained roar. We have a word for the scale of destruction that the Doomsday Machine would unleash: megadeath.

Nobody is pining for megadeath. But megadeath is not the only thing that makes the Doomsday Machine petrifying. The real terror is in its autonomy, this idea that it would be programmed to detect a series of environmental inputs, then to act, without human interference. “There is no chance of human intervention, control, and final decision,” wrote the military strategist Herman Kahn in his 1960 book, On Thermonuclear War, which laid out the hypothetical for a Doomsday Machine. The concept was to render nuclear war unwinnable, and therefore unthinkable.

Continue reading→

Establishment Elites, MSM Think Parler Is A “Threat To Democracy” Because Libertarians, Conservatives Get To Freely Post, by Daisy Luther

Heaven forbid that alternatives arise to challenge the social media giants. From Daisy Luther at theorganicprepper.com:

After years of being censored on Facebook and Twitter, conservatives, libertarians, and other fans of free speech are making a mass exodus to new platforms. One that has really taken off since the election is Parler, which has been the most downloaded app in the country over the past two weeks.

Unsurprisingly, the mainstream media and left-wing extremists are outraged. How dare the people who have been censored, deplatformed, and shut down on their social media sites move to a site that promises not to treat them like pariahs? (By the way, you can find me on Parler here: @daisyluther ) They go as far as to say it’s a “threat to democracy” because libertarians and conservatives get to post.

I mean, seriously, we can’t be letting conservatives and libertarians post their opinions all willy-nilly, right? What will happen without the “fact-checkers?”

Why on earth WOULDN’T people go to a different network?

Personally, I haven’t had access to my own Facebook pages for more than a year and won’t unless I send them photos of my passport, a utility bill, and other identifying information – because they didn’t think my driver’s license was sufficient. As well, I voluntarily archived my thriving preparedness groups because of the threat of losing both my groups, my own personal account, and the accounts of all my moderators if we let through a post of which Facebook disapproved. I wrote more about it here.

And remember when Twitter shut down Zero Hedge’s account for posting something about the coronavirus they deemed as misinformation that was later proven to be true? And how they put warnings on nearly anything the President posts? And how conservative and libertarian websites are being demonetized?

I invite you to try posting anything on standard social media that questions vaccines, the outcome of the election, the COVID lockdowns, or is pro-gun. I’ll see you in Facebook jail.

Continue reading→

Facebook, Twitter and Big Tech Make Their Money in China, by Daniel Greenfield

Facebook, Twitter, and Amazon don’t make much money selling into China, but they make a lot of money by facilitating Chinese sales in the US. From Daniel Greenfield at danielgreenfield.org:

Last year, Amazon was forced to shut down its marketplace business in the People’s Republic of China. Amazon’s defeat followed that of a long line of Big Tech players who had tried to make a go of it in China and failed miserably. China’s economy is built to boost domestic businesses and foreign exports, with some needed imports, by companies linked to the Communist Party.

And no matter how politically correct Amazon may try to be, it can never join that club.

But Amazon’s business in China isn’t done. To a large degree, Amazon’s business is China. Behind the smiling logo, the massive array of businesses covering everything from running the CIA’s cloud to spending $500 million to make a Lord of the Rings streaming series, are a bunch of grim offices, apartments, and warehouses in Chinese cities that make up its real business.

Three years ago, third-party sellers topped Amazon’s own sales. They now make up 58%. Who are they? If, like most Americans, you shop at the giant dot com retail monopoly, you’ve already waded through a stream of random shop names, fake misspelled reviews, and counterfeit products while searching for just about anything. What happened? China happened.

Between 40% to 48% of top third-party sellers on Amazon are operating out of China. The massive growth in Chinese third-party sellers has been fairly recent and transformative.

What Amazon Prime members are really buying is membership in a club that helps third-party sellers from China push counterfeit and imitation products to Americans. Amazon acts as a middle man, charging Chinese sellers and American customers for handling listing, shipping and sales..

Continue reading→

‘Censorship Rubicon’? Big Tech burying Biden-Ukraine story either wakes up Republicans or drives nail in their political coffin, by Tony Cox

Will Republicans go after the big social media companies? From Tony Cox at rt.com:

‘Censorship Rubicon’? Big Tech burying Biden-Ukraine story either wakes up Republicans or drives nail in their political coffin
If Big Tech’s latest censorship fiasco – the suppression of a New York Post scoop that might harm Joe Biden’s presidential campaign – doesn’t spur Republicans to act, they may as well quit pretending to represent their voters.

If even this isn’t enough to trigger so-called conservatives to loosen Silicon Valley’s death grip on America’s public marketplace of ideas, nothing will. All the talk about defending free speech and fighting election interference will be exposed for the meaningless posturing that it is, much like all those years of hearing Republicans campaign on stopping illegal immigration, which they had no intention of doing.

In this case, however, the stakes are more personal for Republican politicians. This isn’t only about throwing their constituents under the bus and giving lip service about political bias while taking donations from the likes of Google and Amazon. This time, the bus is about to run over them and leave tread-marks on their former careers in Washington.→

Continue reading→

Facebook and Twitter Cross a Line Far More Dangerous Than What They Censor, by Glenn Greenwald

If Facebook and Twitter are private companies and can allow whatever they want on their sites, then they are not content neutral platforms, they are publishers, and must be subject to defamation and other laws to which publishers must comply. From Glenn Greenwald at theintercept.com:

Just weeks before the election, the tech giants unite to block access to incriminating reporting about their preferred candidate.

The New York Post is one of the country’s oldest and largest newspapers. Founded in 1801 by Alexander Hamilton, only three U.S. newspapers are more widely circulated. Ever since it was purchased in 1976 by media mogul Rupert Murdoch, it has been known — like most Murdoch-owned papers — for right-wing tabloid sensationalism, albeit one that has some real reporters and editors and is capable of reliable journalism.

On Wednesday morning, the paper published on its cover what it heralded as a “blockbuster” scoop: “smoking gun” evidence, in its words, in the form of emails purportedly showing that Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, traded on his father’s position by securing favors from the then-Vice President to benefit the Ukranian energy company Burisma, which paid the supremely unqualified Hunter $50,000 each month to sit on its Board. While the Biden campaign denies that any such meetings or favors ever occurred, neither the campaign nor Hunter, at least as of now, has denied the authenticity of the emails.

The Post’s hyping of the story as some cataclysmic bombshell was overblown. While these emails, if authenticated, provide some new details and corroboration, the broad outlines of this story have long been known: Hunter was paid a very large monthly sum by Burisma at the same time that his father was quite active in using the force of the U.S. Government to influence Ukraine’s internal affairs.

Continue reading→

Twitter, Facebook Go Full Tilt Protecting Biden Just Weeks After Execs Join Transition Team, by Tyler Durden

The social media outlets aren’t even pretending to be impartial anymore, and nobody would believe them if they tried. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

As if anyone needed more evidence of Silicon Valley’s overt political bias – just weeks before Twitter and Facebook nuked Biden corruption revelations from their platforms with the intensity of a thousand suns, executives from both companies joined the Biden transition team.

Illustration via trishintel.com

In a bombshell report from the New York Post, leaked emails reveal that Hunter Biden introduced his father to a Burisma executive less than a year before then-VP Joe Biden pressured the Ukrainian government into firing its chief prosecutor investigating the company – something Biden openly bragged about on tape.

As soon as the news hit, social media cracked downsuspending accounts who shared the story – including the NY Post, and preventing people from tweeting it or sharing it in Direct Messages (DMs). Twitter defended itself, claiming in a nebulous statement that they do not allow ‘content obtained through hacking that contains private information, may put people in physical harm or danger, or contains trade secrets.’

The Biden emails weren’t hacked – they were found on a laptop reportedly dropped off at a Delaware computer repair store. Yet, Twitter had no problem allowing President Trump’s leaked tax records on the platform.

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→