 |
| The most chilling suggestion, however, comes from the politicians and academics who have called for the censorship of social media and the internet. The only thing spreading faster than the coronavirus has been censorship and the loud calls for more restrictions on free speech. ************************* |
BUT let's just look at this right here here's I JUST I googled for you censorship because i know it's difficult to do it says right here the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books films news etc that are considered obscene politically unacceptable or a threat to security okay there's one definition let's go ahead and look at the ALCU definition of censorship it says right here ALCU censorship the suppression of words images or ideas that are offensive happens whenever some people succeed in imposing their personal political or moral values on others so it doesn't have to do with the government the government censoring is against the first amendment that is legally and cons it's unconstitutional for the government to do it but censorship cons it happens in many forms . (8)>>Fact Checkers were busy through November and January "checking" on anyone who disputed the election result . Many people on social media posts were "tagged" as "false information". Incredible as it seems .YouTube for example , In a blog post, YouTube said content “that misleads people by alleging that widespread fraud or errors changed the outcome” of the presidential election will be removed. I disputed the election my self , what I saw was the all major news media calling Biden the winner why before there was a actual count of the mail in ballots -absentee . Many people did oppose the results posted their own opinions we wrongfully tagged . According to social analytics platforms such as NewsWhip and CrowdTangle, however, claims about voting irregularities have become among the most-shared content on Facebook. Once the election was called for Biden, the top performing posts briefly changed: where Bongino, for instance, had been in the top 10 for the previous 37 days, the top performing posts on 7 November were led by the New York Times, CNN and NPR; the day after, CNN and NPR between them occupied seven of the top 10 slots.That marked shift caused some, such as Mother Jones editor-in-chief Clara Jeffery, to wonder if Facebook had deliberately altered its algorithm to curry favour with the Biden administration. Others argued that it was more likely just a rare burst of activity from happy leftwing users on the site.
Censoring anti-Vaccination opinions.
(9)>>NOW that there are three different COVID vaccines . There has been a effort to mass vaccinate a great number of people at a time . I pointed that out in my blog explaining the coming Vaccine quagmire in a early post . (9.1)>>Rushing the vaccine should give anyone any questions , its their own right . I am a anti-vex'er I admit it here . NOW their justification for that is the danger of “fake news” about coronavirus risks and cures. Yet this is only the latest rationalization for rolling back free speech rights. For years, Democratic leaders in Congress called for censorship of “fake news” on social media sites. Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube have all engaged in increasing levels of censorship and have a well known reputation for targeting conservative speech. BUT we have been getting bits and pieces of "news" that the vaccine does have some serious side effects , this has happened to people who have taken the second dose of the Covid vaccine. Again not much has been said because the government now wants a lot of people to get the shot in the arm , but as I saying , the vaccination efforts can turn ugly later by forcing people to have it regardless if they don't want it . From the UK social media giants agreed a package of measures with ministers to tackle anti-vaccine misinformation. (10)>>Facebook, Twitter and Google promised to “step up work with public health bodies to promote factual and reliable messages” and committed to “swifter responses to flagged content”. "Throughout the coronavirus pandemic, big tech has made bold claims of intent, but failed to follow through with effective action. It is vital that there are sanctions when social media companies fail to fulfil their duty of care to users and society at large. The government must stop falling for big tech’s excuses, and introduce financial and criminal penalties for failures that lead to serious harm.
GROWING MEDIA DIVISIVE BIAS.
This subjectivity of censorship is why the cure is worse than the illness. The best cure for bad speech is more speech rather than regulation. Trump’s unique approach to social media has largely been attributed to his troublesome relationship with what is considered by many to be the (11)>>“mainstream media.” He has continuously attacked the media for bias and claimed they treat him extremely unfairly. This leads to a greater philosophical question of whether President Trump is correct in asserting that the media have been biased in their reporting about him. If so, is it reasonable to expect news networks to be 100% free of any and all bias? Another important question to be asked is what is the impact of biased news coverage? Could partisanship or polarization be impacted by bias?Most U.S. news organizations have evolved from serious fact-based reporting to what is now opinion-based reporting designed to entertain and push their own agendas. Our country is becoming more divided, and (12)>>I am convinced the news media is a major factor in the current levels of hostility. The news media should not be a propaganda arm for a political party or candidate. Media executives, journalists, producers and writers should not be in the business of skewing the facts to push their own agenda and sensationalize news.Since 1994, the number of Americans who see the opposing political party as a threat to “the nation’s well-being” has doubled. This deepening polarization has predictable results: government shutdowns, violent protests, and scathing attacks on elected officials.Perceptions of media credibility have dropped since 2016, according to Morning Consult analysis, largely fueled by Republican attitudes. Democrats and Republicans also tend to trust headlines from outlets that society considers closer to their ideology, although that changes by topic.Different medias have different biases. For example, Fox News is said to be right-leaning, whereas CNN is said to be more left-leaning. (13)>>But ultimately, everything is biased. Everyone has opinions, and their opinions inevitably bleed into what they produce. And there is nothing inherently wrong with bias, as long as there's a certain honesty about it.
NOTES AND COMMENTS: (1)>>fall for the first Amendment ? Big Tech is now full of "Fact Checkers".The fact-check labels, for instance, seem like an obvious fix — tell people that what they are seeing is wrong — but that feature has a cascading effect that warps the perception of every piece of content in a user’s feed. In fact, the sights of the broader fact-checking movement often seem to be set on something different than strict truth and falsehood. And by acknowledging that, the fact-checkers might grapple with some important questions about the project in which they’re engaged—and might see more clearly the box in which they’ve trapped themselves.But while the language of fact-checking is powerful, it’s also limited—and the fact-checkers’ tendency to stretch that language beyond its limitations undermines the credibility of their project.(1.2)>>the loud calls for more restrictions on free speech. In reporting a statement from an official of a civil liberties group, U.S.News & World Report made the comment: “Cyberspace [computer networks] may give freedom of speech more muscle than the First Amendment does. Indeed, it may already ‘have become literally impossible for a government to shut people up.’” One point of regular debate is whether there is a free speech breaking point, a line at which the hateful or harmful or controversial nature of speech should cause it to lose constitutional protection under the First Amendment. But apart from those exceptions, the Supreme Court has held strongly to the view that our nation believes in the public exchange of ideas and open debate, that the response to offensive speech is to speak in response. The dichotomy—society generally favoring free speech, but individuals objecting to the protection of particular messages—and the debate over it seem likely to continue unabated. (1.3)>>Left or right, you should oppose censorship of the "other team". The common enemy is the Federal government who is the bitch of conglomerate and Big Biz. Big Tech was trying to take away free speech before this Trump's disputing voting incident. There were videos and documentaries about it and things that happened in that Arab Spring movement are part of the excuse Big Tech is using. We need to kick BigTech to the curb. Because of anti-trust/monopoly laws never being enforced, BigTech keeps growing. Even if you stopped all Google, Twitter, and Facebook, Amazon owns most of the servers in the USA, I heard. That part of its co. is called AWS. Anytime Amazon dislikes a site, it can kick it off of their servers. Besides, what if a virus hits AWS and takes them out?! Isn't that close to this stupid "too big to fail" crap?! An AWS worm/virus could take out half of the internet Americans use. (2)>>Someone wants people to kickback and they will use that reaction to justify a bigger clamp down and even more censorship. Regarding the media coup, it seems that the conservative movement, the Republican party in particular, have put out in front as their spokesmans, people who who are in place to deflect attention away from the real power behind what’s happening. That is vis a vis, people who appear to be, and can be attacked as being, incompetent, thus giving the appearance that the Republican party is falling to pieces, when my own feelings are that nothing could be further from the truth. It is also very interesting that the “progressive” voices in the media seem to be swallowing this hook line and sinker.” . . . . Facebook is partnering with the Atlantic Council in another effort to combat election-related propaganda and misinformation from proliferating on its service. The social networking giant said that a partnership with the Washington D.C.-based think tank would help it better spot disinformation during upcoming world elections. The partnership is one of a number of steps Facebook is taking to prevent the spread of propaganda and fake news after failing to stop it from spreading on its service in the run up to the 2016 U.S. presidential election. ..(3)>>The Day Donald Trump was cut off from Twitter . Facebook and Instagram suspended Trump at least until Inauguration Day. Twitch and Snapchat also disabled Trump’s accounts. To top it all off, Twitter ended a nearly 12-year run and shuttered his account, severing an instant line of communication to his 89 million followers. Many of Twitter’s more than 5,400 employees opposed having Mr. Trump on the platform.It's really strange to see people making this point over and over again as if it's literally moral that two billionaires control modern methods of communication. And it's not like they invented any of it, that shit just rose up with the Internet and they happened to own the most popular platforms when the dust settled. I ain't saying they shouldn't have blocked Trump, and I'm definitely not saying that I'm not happy about it, but it's strange seeing people be so flippant over the fact that our main methods of mass communication exist beyond the control of government and all the rules and laws that regulate government.The decision was a punctuation mark on the Trump presidency that immediately drew accusations of political bias and fresh scrutiny of the tech industry’s power over public discourse. Interviews with a dozen current and former Twitter insiders over the past week opened a window into how it was made — driven by a group of Dorsey’s lieutenants who overcame their boss’ reservations, but only after a deadly rampage at the Capitol. saying he had broken the site’s rules by inciting violence. Facebook did the same, indefinitely, and Instagram (which Facebook owns) banned Trump for at least the duration of his term. Amazon made similar moves by kicking Parler, an alternative social media platform favored by right-wing groups, off its servers, causing the site to go dark. Reddit, Snapchat, Twitch, and many other platforms made similar moves to limit or ban Trump’s content.So, is Twitter a public entity that doesn’t deserve the protections of the First Amendment? No, that’s silly — but there’s at least some irony in this idea coming back to haunt internet companies. Social media giants including Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit have long sold a vision of themselves as exalted public squares. In this vision, they bring people together across the world and even lift them up from the poverty of being disconnected, ensuring them the right to free expression. Facebook still tries to appear neutral on policing speech. In a public address on free speech last year, Zuckerberg said that Facebook doesn’t fact-check political ads because it’s not “right for a private company to censor politicians or the news in democracy.” As Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey took on Trump this week, Zuckerberg knocked his rival on Fox News. “We have a different policy than Twitter on this,” Zuckerberg said, even though the company’s policies aren’t really that different. “I believe strongly that Facebook shouldn’t be the arbiter of truth of everything that people say online.” (4)>>repeal section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Section 230 is a US law enacted in 1996 that says providers and users of interactive computer services shall not be held liable for "any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected." (5)>>BUT the Censorship started in China before the US media went along with it. In late LAST March, the U.S. became the global epicenter of the pandemic. As the virus devastated healthcare systems and communities across the country, questions and rumors surrounding the origin of COVID-19 were propagated by leaders in the U.S. and China, straining relations between the two countries. Censored content in this period includes so called conspiracy theories, ANY criticism of China’s political system, critical and neutral references to China-US relations, and U.S. domestic politics was silenced by the American Media . As Pres. Trump was accused of bias towards Asians . Trump repeatedly challenged the media by calling the Covid virus that " Wuhan or China Virus" . Social Media immediately tried to block any references that the virus was any kind of bio weapon. OR EVEN ANY SPECULATION of it being SO. (6)>>Li Wenliang, the Chinese doctor. His death was confirmed by the Wuhan hospital where he worked and was being treated, following conflicting reports about his condition on state media.Dr Li, 34, tried to send a message to fellow medics about the outbreak at the end of December. Three days later police paid him a visit and told him to stop. He returned to work and caught the virus from a patient. He had been in hospital for at least three weeks.He posted his story from his hospital bed last month on social media site Weibo. "Hello everyone, this is Li Wenliang, an ophthalmologist at Wuhan Central Hospital," the post begins. (7)>>Journalist Glenn Greenwald is blasting Facebook. Journalist Glenn Greenwald is blasting Facebook for its choice to crackdown on customers posting feedback concerning the coronavirus vaccine that undermine official info being offered by “authorities.”Greenwald, a Pulitzer-prize successful reporter, stated social media giants like Facebook are below immense stress from mainstream media shops to censor dissenting opinion.Greenwald stated the concept that Facebook would stifle dissent concerning the vaccine is “extra pernicious than opinion-based censorship.”“The whole lot they do, these liberal guardians of orthodoxy and piety, is about attempting to make you suppose that they’ve a monopoly on goal fact by calling it ‘science.’ Science is a human examine, which implies it’s fallible, and precisely as you stated, this can be very harmful to say that any type of human information is so unchallengeable to being mentioned that it’s off-limits from even being questioned,” he stated. (8)>>Fact Checkers were busy through November and January "checking" on anyone who disputed the election result . The modern-day fact checking movement can be dated back to the presidency of Ronald Reagan, who attracted widespread ridicule for his claim that trees cause four times more pollution than automobiles. The ascent of political bloggers during the 2004 campaign put additional pressure on The Post and other mainstream news outlets to upgrade their fact checking operations. The Internet has democratized the fact-checking process by making information that was previously available only through expensive news databases such as Lexis-Nexis easily accessible to bloggers without any research budget. The fact checking movement has provided journalists with an additional tool for exposing political spin and increasingly sophisticated media manipulation techniques. In order to make the most effective use of this tool, however, fact checkers need to ally themselves more closely with readers, a source of invaluable expertise. Future directions for fact-checking include “crowd sourcing,” “audience integration,” and the creation of networks of authoritative experts. (9)>>NOW that there are three different COVID vaccines . In the eleven months elapsed since the identification of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and its genome, an exceptional effort by the scientific community has led to the development of over 300 vaccine projects. Over 40 are now undergoing clinical evaluation, ten of these are in Phase III clinical trials, three of them have ended Phase III with positive results. A few of these new vaccines are being approved for emergency use. Existing data suggest that new vaccine candidates may be instrumental in protecting individuals and reducing the spread of pandemic. The conceptual and technological platforms exploited are diverse, and it is likely that different vaccines will show to be better suited to distinct groups of the human population.(9.1)>>Rushing the vaccine should give anyone any questions , its their own right .More than 35 million Americans have received Covid vaccines, but the much-touted system the government designed to monitor any dangerous reactions won’t be capable of analyzing safety data for weeks or months, according to numerous federal health officials.For now, federal regulators are counting on a patchwork of existing programs that they acknowledge are inadequate because of small sample size, missing critical data or other problems. This doesn't mean the risks are zero, so in the very rare cases where the risks happen, like the anaphylaxes in 1/1,000,000 kids in prior vaccines, those super rare cases are compensated and they certainly don't negate the positive results for the vast majority of everyone else.Here is an excerpt from a recent article in Nature: "A possible concern could be that some mRNA-based vaccine platforms54,166 induce potent type I interferon responses, which have been associated not only with inflammation but also potentially with autoimmunity167,168." OP was not inaccurate in saying there is a possible connection between mrna technology and automimmune issues. Is there specific evidence of causation yet? No. But lack of evidence is not the same as proof of no connection. (10)>>Facebook, Twitter and Google promised to “step up work with public health bodies to promote factual and reliable messages”. Many of us in the free speech community have warned about the growing insatiable appetite for censorship in the West. Yet we have been losing the fight, and free speech opponents are now capitalizing on the opportunity presented by the pandemic. Representative Adam Schiff👉👉 sent a message to the executives of Google, Twitter, and YouTube demanding censorship of anything deemed “misinformation” and “false information.” Yet YouTube did exactly that a few days earlier by removing two videos of California doctors who called for the easing of state lockdown orders. (11)>>“mainstream media.” Most of the people who think the media is "Liberal" think that unions are communist. Not that they could define those words without a dictionary. But they sure do sound good and scary. NOW if you actually measured the "truthfulness" of any media outlet you should expect variation month-to-month and variation between outlets with identical political views.The only news I believe is wild speculation, conspiracy theories, and anecdotal evidence with nothing credible to back it up. If you can't confirm it, it means the Lame Stream Media has covered up the evidence and it must be true! RIGHT NOW, the last four years back the media was dominated by Trump scandals . Right now were now seeing that COVID took over as the dominate there "scare" tactic of the mainstream media to polarize Americans who are delusional to begin with . Also the more people complain about the mainstream media, the more likely they are turning to even more fringe partisan rags for information. Sharing YouTube videos and tweets as reliable sources. (12)>>I am convinced the news media is a major factor in the current levels of hostility. From 2017 mainstream media fueled a anti-Trump bias from the start , but gradually by 2020 the focus was the BLM " social Justice" riots . How far did the media provoked the unrest . Media was in support of the riots , using the "terms" peacful protesters . Remember that "Capitol chaos" "Trump supporters storm chambers, lawmakers evacuated!" Where were these blaring headlines when the Black Lives Matter/Antifa mobs were rioting, looting and destroying businesses and police property? Where was Biden's outrage then? The media blamed Trump for police brutality , the murder of George Floyd . Yet, the average thinking person knows that Trump was not responsible for the riots that hit nation last year .Violence, whether from the left or the right, is never acceptable! Trump did not want what happened at the D.C. rally to evolve into what happened in the halls of Congress. This was perhaps a boiling point that derived from the BLM riots . (13)>>But ultimately, everything is biased. Which means we are not getting the whole picture of news and events in our world. How do you get a more complete picture? Seek out sources that challenge your bias. In other words, get your news from the spectrum of bias: conservative, liberal and centrist sources.
