Search This Blog

De Omnibus Dubitandum - Lux Veritas

Showing posts with label Social Media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Media. Show all posts

Friday, April 19, 2024

The Unreal Politics of Unreal Men

By @ Sultan Knish Blog

 
 
Congress threatened to block China from controlling TikTok, the company riled up a mob of tweens to threaten Congress. If the Senate gives in, the outcome will be real enough.

TikTok certainly is real life. If you doubt it, look at the rate of teenage girls who have themselves mutilated because of trans trends on the app, even younger girls who killed themselves over material in the app’s algorithm or the spread of verbal or motor ‘tics’ to teens over the platform.

Social media isn’t real in the same way as the wind and the rain, or the laws of physics or economics, it’s an alternate reality spread through the internal realities of our minds.

Before social media, there was just media, the concentration of mass media, radio, film and newspapers that wrecked much of the twentieth century and killed millions of people. It is no coincidence that some of the most destructive social and political movements arose in line with the growth of the media. It’s impossible to imagine Nazism or Communism without the media.

What made people think that the Third Reich or the Communist revolution were viable? The Communists and Nazis were savvy propagandists who took full advantage of newspapers, film and all the elements of modern spectacle to concoct an alternate reality for millions of people. The crowds at Hitler rallies or Communist marches were living in their own version of the real world. And it was not until Hitler shot himself in his bunker or the Berlin Wall fell that they woke up to find that everything they believed had been as delusional.as anything on TikTok.

Social media is more unreal than media because, like Hitler rallies, it’s a mutual fantasy. TikTok denizens take that to the next level through triumphs over reality by claiming, for example, that Helen Keller never existed. Like a magical world, social media is a place where people can create their reality and then use intimidation and peer pressure to enforce it on others.

In this state of affairs, millions will believe that men can become women. And vice versa.

What was a consensual mutual fantasy within a like minded group became a non consensual fantasy once it was being imposed on women in locker rooms and swimming matches. The process by which the fantasy of a small group became a sexual assault on a larger society parallels how the unreal realities of narrow groups, whether it’s Communists fantasizing about the abolition of private property or master race fetishists, becomes a form of violence when a private fantasy is tethered to political power and imposed on the unwilling millions.

The unreal is sustained first by the delusions of those who wish to believe, then by persuadable useful idiots, then by mass propaganda and finally by force, social, political and finally violence as the failure of the unreal makes its devotees desperate to uphold it by any means necessary.

The power of the unreal lies in the magic of its unreality. Whether it entails transforming economics, gender or our understanding of the universe, revolutionary movements promise to reveal what is hidden and to accomplish the impossible if people just believe. But to believe, people must leave the realm of the real and enter into the alternate universe of the unreal.

Unreal politics depend on an unreal life. In times past, mass ignorance of the larger world made it possible for entire peoples to believe that their destinies depended on constellations or conversations with trees. There was no larger reality and so much of life took place in the unreal. But the citizens of modern civilization had to be immersed in the unreal. And only the advent of the mass media made it possible to immerse millions in unreal alternate realities.

The more people inhabit an alternate reality, the more they can be convinced to believe in anything. The phenomenon that began with the dawn of the media is reaching its apotheosis.

People could be skeptical of what they read in one newspaper, but the age of mass media introduced a barrage of newspapers, and then supplemented them with immediate messaging from radio broadcasts and then cinematic newsreels. The sheer concentration of park speakers, newspaper editorials, magazines, and headlines marching across the silver screen proved much harder to resist because it created an enveloping effect seemingly from everywhere.

Beyond politics, mass media made life unreal. People began taking fashion cues, life advice and moral guidance from the media. When celebrities divorced, it became more normalized, when they committed suicide, a rash of suicides followed. Millions of people stopped using their own judgment and took to repeating whatever they heard as if media culture was their society.

Reality fractured. Nations went to war or went bankrupt. The family fell apart. And throughout it all, the population climbed deeper and farther into the alternate reality of the media.

The internet fragmented that alternate reality and it made way for more immersive and less relatable echo chambers. The old media ceased to be able to speak to anyone outside its echo chamber, but the new media was even more unreal and less tethered to external reality. And the old media came to chase the fantasies of the new media no matter what dead ends they led to.

The old media, Hollywood, cable news and the rest of what’s left of the old mass media apparatus struggle to compete with the truly immersive swipe, stream and social media culture that not only surround smartphone users, but climb inside their heads and invite them to enter another world. And waiting in the wings is an augmented reality metaverse populated by AI bots that will make the worst of the current social media seem like the early days of the internet.

A preview of it can be founded on ‘child-friendly’ metaverses like Roblox or Minecraft where eight-year-olds are groomed by sexual predators, ordered to carve names in blood, like the recently exposed ‘764’ international network, and where reality becomes malleable long before children have reached an age where they have any sense of a clear and definite truth.

That is the same reason why the transgender movement is targeting increasingly younger kids.

Mass indoctrination programs always work best with the young. Children are the easiest to introduce to an imaginary world. And they will have the hardest time breaking away from it.

Children have always lived in imaginary worlds, but as mass media turned to colonizing those words, seizing control over them and imposing rules that crippled childhood imaginations, it also groomed each generation to buy its commercial products and then its ideological products.

What began with a for-profit colonization of childhood became a non-profit colonization in the same way that most of the old infrastructure of capitalism became political enterprises. ‘Woke’ and ‘broke’ are true, but also miss the point. The goal of the ESG system is for corporations to produce primarily political outcomes. Rather than achieving profits through competition, ESG secures wealth by consolidating political control over entire nations. That begins with children.

Woke corporations care very little what anyone over forty thinks about them. That is why the vast majority of advertising is aimed at younger audiences. Despite their assurances to their shareholders, they are not thinking about the next quarter, but about the right side of history.

The collective labor to create a utopia with an ideal outcome for everyone is a fantasy that has overtaken entire societies. The only reason anyone believes in it is that life has become unreal.

The degrees of unreality began with the rise of an upper class and then a middle class that had been sheltered from the realities of life and had a poor understanding of basic external realities. Newspapers, novels, theater, radio, film, television, the internet, social media and smartphones each came with a jump in radical politics as life became ever more mediated and unreal.

America’s early settlers struggled, but had a fairly tight grip on common sense, but by the mid-19th century, middle class families, with little understanding of settlement, headed West because they had been enraptured by popular accounts and worthless guide books, with no understanding of what it would take to make the trip, suffered and in some cases died.

They were already living in an alternate reality created by an early form of media.

Today, a population insulated by multiple media layers believes in seven impossible things before breakfast. Politicians, with no idea of how to accomplish anything, make worthless promises based on whatever trends on social media, run up trillions in debt and believe that they are making the world a better place without ever knowing the world as it truly is.

The concentrations of power, whether in D.C. or Silicon Valley, are more unreal than ever, mad courts where the echo chambers of power allow the elites to flirt with insane fantasies.

Anything seemed possible in Woodstock. Anything seems possible when playing with $6 trillion budgets. And anything can seem to be true in a modern university critical studies course.

Unreality has become our religion. Traditional faiths are falling away in favor of this unreality.

Our elites believe that we can all inhabit their unreal utopia if only we believe, make the appropriate sacrifices and stamp out all skepticism. And then the magic will be unleashed.

All of this seems more plausible to the laptop class who already live in a magical world where any food they want arrives in a few swipes, their screens hold endless entertainment and the world seems to exist to service them. In this unreal world, everything seems possible.

Living in it, reality seems like a distant fantasy. Fully automated luxury Communism, gender transformation, a global order and plastic bags summoning the wrath of Mother Earth are real.

The ancient pharaohs had no trouble believing that they were gods, because for a limited time they were. And for a much more limited time, our elites, either ancient and powerful, or young and wielding dot com enabled jobs, appear to be because they are detached from reality.

Living unreal lives, they adopt unreal beliefs until the unreal bubble of their lives bursts.

But where the pharaohs and ancient monarchs lived unreal lives on account of their power, the unreal inhabitants have been wrapped in unreality by media. Their power is an illusion. They are not god-kings, they have little real power, only a power fantasy fed to them by those with actual power. Whether it’s corporate media or radical politics, the true power lies with those who control the tap, not to those who get drunk on the unreal fantasies they provide.

The more the West loses itself in an unreal world, the worse the real world becomes. 
 

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation. Thank you for reading.

Monday, March 13, 2023

Do Social Media Platforms Have Civic Responsibilities?

Christine Rosen 

Private companies such as Meta (which owns Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp), Twitter, Snapchat, and the like are clearly not traditional civic institutions. They have users, not citizens; they offer terms of service, not rights; users have no duties to the platform beyond the surrender of their time and attention; and technology companies have great leeway when it comes to content moderation and censorship of users who violate those terms of service. They are for-profit businesses, not institutions devoted to the public good.

And yet the language of civics often infuses discussions of the power and impact of these platforms, and the leaders of these companies often invoke civic virtues to define their missions (and craft a more compelling public-relations narrative). “People see Twitter as a public square, and therefore they have expectations that they would have of a public square,” Twitter’s Jack Dorsey told Rolling Stone.1 He later expanded that assessment, arguing, “Twitter is the closest thing we have to a global consciousness.”2 Elon Musk repeated the public-square claim during his bid to acquire the platform: “Free speech is the bedrock of a functioning democracy, and Twitter is the digital town square where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated.”

Such invocations of the public square or the town square by the founders of technology companies are not necessarily disingenuous, but they are misleading. These executives use familiar language about civic values even as their platforms at times allow or encourage behavior that actively undermines those values..............To Read More...


Tuesday, December 6, 2022

How Corrupt is a Corrupt Media?

The media has ceased to exist, and the public plods on by assuming as true whatever the media suppresses and as false whatever the media covers.

By

They have adopted in their news coverage a utilitarian view that noble progressive ends justify almost any unethical means to obtain them. The media is unapologetically fused with the Democratic Party, the bicoastal liberal elite, and the progressive agenda. 

The result is that the public cannot trust that the news it hears or reads is either accurate or true. The news as presented by these outlets has been carefully filtered to suppress narratives deemed inconvenient or antithetical to the political objectives of these entities, while inflating themes deemed useful.

This bias now accompanies increasing (and increasingly obvious) journalistic incompetence. Lax standards reflect weaponized journalism schools and woke ideology that short prior basic requisites of writing and ethical protocols of quoting and sourcing. In sum, a corrupt media that is ignorant, arrogant, and ideological explains why few now trust what it delivers.

Suppression

Once a story is deemed antithetical to left-wing agendas, there arises a collective effort to smother it. Suppression is achieved both by neglect, and by demonizing others who report an inconvenient truth as racists, conspiracist “right-wingers,” and otherwise irredeemable. 

The Hunter Biden laptop story is the locus classicus. Social media branded the authentic laptop as Russian disinformation. That was a lie. But the deception did not stop them from censoring and squashing those who reported the truth. 

Instead of carefully examining the contents of the laptop or interrogating Biden-company players such as Tony Bobulinksi, the media hyped the ridiculous disinformation hoax as a mechanism for suppressing the damaging pre-election story altogether.

Joe Biden’s cognitive state was another suppression story. The media simply stifled the truth that 2020 candidate Biden was unable to conduct a normal campaign due to his frailty and non-compos-mentis status. Few fully reported his often cruel and racist outbursts of the “lying-dog-faced-pony-soldier” and “you ain’t black”/“terrorist” sort. 

The #MeToo media predictably quashed the Tara Reade disclosure. In fact, journalists turned on her in the manner that they previously had insisted was sexist and defamatory “blame-the-victim” smearing. 

Joe Biden has long suffered from a sick tic of creepily intruding into the private space of young women and preteen girls: blowing their hair, talking into their ears, squeezing their necks, hugging in full body embraces—all for far too long. In other words, Biden should have expected the Charlie Rose or the Donald Trump Access Hollywood media treatment. Instead, he was de facto exonerated by collective media silence. To this day, despite staffers’ efforts to corral his wandering hands and head, he occasionally reverts to form with his creepy fixations with younger women. 

Ask the media today which administration surveilled journalists and they will likely cry “Trump!” Yet their own sensationalist reporting that the IRS was weaponized by Trump was proven a lie when the inspector general noted Trump never went after either James Comey or Andrew McCabe. And it was an untruth comparable to the smear that “nuclear secrets” and “nuclear codes” were hidden away at Mar-a-Lago or that Donald Trump sought to profit from the trove. Nor does anyone remember that Barack Obama went after the Associated Press reporters and Fox News Channel’s James Rosen. Nor do they care that Biden sought to birth an Orwellian Ministry of Truth censorship bureau.

Fantasy

The media does not just suppress, but concocts. The entire Russian-collusion hoax—Robert Mueller’s vain 22-month and $40 million investigation—was a complete waste of time on the one hand, but on the other an effective effort to destroy the effectiveness of an elected president. 

How many print and television celebrity journalists declared that Trump would shortly resign, be jailed, or impeached over the pee-pee tape or Christopher Steele’s other mishmash of lies? The problem for the media in promoting the fallacious dossier was not just that it was untrue, but that it was so awfully written, so obviously poorly sourced, and so Drudge Report-like amateurishly sensational that it could not be appear factual to any sane person—other than an agenda-driven and addled journalist who found it useful.

Do we remember the Hillary Clinton-approved Alfa Bank/Trump Tower fable that is now resurfacing for a second try? 

Or the Jussie Smollett caper that trumped even the Brett Kavanaugh-as-teenage-assaulter and rapist lie? Or the Covington kids fabrications that trumped the Duke lacrosse hoax that trumped the “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” myth that trumped the “white Hispanic,” doctored photo/edited 911 call smear about George Zimmerman? 

Recall Trump’s supposed “immigration jails” and “kids in cages” at the border—in truth both not cages and in fact birthed by Obama

Then there was Trump’s supposedly impeachable offense of purportedly canceling military aid to Ukraine so that he could allegedly hound the innocent Biden family—rather than delaying, but not canceling, offensive arms vetoed by the Obama Administration for the prescient worry that the Biden family had left a trail of corruption in Ukraine.  

Who ran with the “voter suppression” untruth that Stacey Abrams was the “real” governor of Georgia or the yarn that Donald Trump was illegitimately elected? How exactly did Jeffery Epstein and Harvey Weinstein operate as sexual perverts and high-profile, liberal-benefacting deviants for years without media scrutiny? Who created the cable news myth of now-felon Michael Avenatti as presidential timber? 

Chronological Manipulation

Why, after the midterms, did we suddenly learn that Donald Trump did not, as in the case of Barack Obama’s Lois Lerner skullduggery, manipulate the IRS for political purposes to go after James Comey and Andrew McCabe? Why suddenly post-election did we read that his presidential papers at Mar-a-Lago really did not contain “nuclear codes” and “nuclear secrets” or stuff intended for sale? Why did we learn after November 8 that a special counsel was suddenly appointed? Why did we discover the Ponzi scheme of Sam Bankman-Fried only after the midterms and why is he treated as an aw-shucks teen in bum drag rather than a calculating and conniving crook?

The answer is the same as why, just days before the 2016 election, we were assured suddenly by the media that the DNC’s planted stories about Christopher Steele’s dossier “proved” that Trump was a Russian stooge. 

Asymmetry 

When did the media finally dribble out that Obama’s memoir Dreams From My Father was chock full of lies and thus was intended all along to be read as “impressionistic” rather than factual? 

We only learned belatedly that Hillary Clinton did not brave the front lines in virtual combat in Bosnia. We were assured that she was completely out of the loop on the Uranium One deal and thus knew nothing about the cash that poured into the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton’s honoraria from Russian sources

Did the media ever fully report that Hillary Clinton: 1) broke the law by using a personal server to communicate while Secretary of State; 2) lied about the missing emails by claiming they were all personal about “yoga” and “weddings” and such; 3) destroyed subpoenaed evidence by smashing her devices; 4) had her husband accidently bump into Attorney General Loretta Lynch on a Phoenix tarmac who was supposedly investigating Clinton at the time; and 5) became our first major election denialist by declaring “Russian collusion” to be true, Donald Trump to be illegitimately elected, and the 2016 balloting to be “rigged”?

Unethical Behavior 

Our once lions of network news were long ago revealed to have feet of clay. Dan Rather insisted that “fake but true” memos “proved” George W. Bush got special exemptions from military service. Brian Williams fabricated an entire Walter-Mitty fantasy existence with ease. The Wiki Leaks Podesta trove revealed blue-chip reporters checking in with the Clinton campaign and the DNC to “fact check” and brainstorm their pre-publication puff pieces.

Throughout the Obama years, Ben Rhodes, the failed novelist and deputy national security advisor distorted U.S. foreign policy, as CBS News, overseen by his brother, warped its coverage of him. 

Do we remember the commentary on MSNBC of the brilliant Vanderbilt professor and MSNBC “analyst,” presidential historian Jon Meacham? He periodically praised Joe Biden’s eloquence and moving addresses without informing his audience that he contributed to or indeed helped write what he gushed about. No problem. Even after finally being fired, Meacham is still at it, offering his input on Biden’s September 1, Phantom-of-the-Opera “un-American” rant.

CNN Sums It Up

The long, slow death of Jeffery Zucker’s CNN is emblematic of all the mortal sins listed above of our present-day corrupt media.

It is ancient history now and thus forgotten that the self-righteous MSNBC anchorman Lawrence O’Donnell falsely claimed that Deutsche Bank documents would prove that Russian oligarchs co-signed a loan application for Donald Trump. 

Over a decade ago, CNN’s Candy Crowley—remember this impartial “moderator” of the second 2012 presidential debate?—infamously transformed before our very television eyes into an active and shameless partisan by attacking candidate Mitt Romney. CNN commentator Donna Brazile topped Crowley when she unethically leaked primary-debate questions to candidate Hillary Clinton. When pressed, Brazile serially denied her role.

CNN’s former Obamaite Jim Sciutto is known as a serial offender of journalistic ethics and was recently the subject of an internal investigation. Sciutto has also alleged, falsely, that the CIA had yanked a high-level spy out of Moscow because of President Trump’s supposedly dangerously reckless handling of classified information. Sciutto joined CNN’s Carl Bernstein and Marshall Cohen to falsely report that Lanny Davis’ client Michael Cohen would soon assert that Trump had prior knowledge of an upcoming meeting between his son and Russian interests.

Another CNN trio of Thomas Frank, Eric Lichtblau, and Lex Harris were forced out from CNN for their mythologies that the Trump-hating Anthony Scaramucci was directly involved in a $10 billion Russian fund.

That Donald Trump never reiterated America’s commitment to honor NATO’s critical Article 5 guarantee. The quartet of CNN’s Gloria Borger, Eric Lichtblau, Jake Tapper, and Brian Rokus all were exposed wrongly assuring that former FBI director James Comey would unequivocally contradict President Trump’s prior assertion that Comey had told him he was not under investigation. 

CNN reporter Manu Raju in December 2017 trafficked in lots of fake news stories that Donald Trump, Jr. supposedly had prior access to the hacked WikiLeaks documents. And he offered another fable that Trump, Jr. would be indicted by Mueller’s special-counsel investigation. But then, who at CNN did not blast out such “bombshells” and “walls are closing in” lies?

The once supposedly great Chris Cuomo—finally fired for softball incestuous interviews with his brother Andrew while serving as confidant to his sibling’s sexual-harassment dilemmas—had been caught on tape screaming obscenities. He also lied on the air when he assured a CNN audience in 2016 that it was illegal for citizens to examine the just-released WikiLeaks emails.

Julia Ioffe was eagerly hired by CNN after Politico fired her for tweeting that the president and his daughter Ivanka might have had an incestuous sexual relationship. CNN Anderson Cooper was every bit as creepy. He harangued a pro-Trump panelist with “If he [Trump] took a dump on his desk, you would defend it!”

Erstwhile CNN religious “expert” Reza Aslan was not so subtle. He trashed Trump as “this piece of sh**.” The late CNN cooking show guru Anthony Bourdain openly joked about poisoning Trump with hemlock. Recall CNN New Year’s Eve host Kathy Griffin posing with a bloody facsimile of Trump’s severed head. Was there something in the CNN contract that stipulated CNN journalists had to be obscene, vulgar, and threatening? 

The CNN circus also hired as a “security analyst” the admitted liar James Clapper. So, was it any surprise that on spec Clapper did what he was hired to do—by falsely claiming that President Trump was a veritable Russian asset?

But for that matter, former CIA director Michael Hayden preposterously alleged that Trump’s immigration policies resembled those in the death camps of Nazi Germany. Was it any wonder either that CNN host Sally Kohn and her roundtable panelists raised their hands to reverberate the “hands up, don’t shoot” lie of the Ferguson shooting?

Do the bias, invective, and lack of ethics of the media even matter anymore? 

In truth, media corruption has changed the course of recent history. 

Had the true nature of the contents of the Hunter Biden laptop been reported, the 2020 voters have polled that the revelation may well have made a difference because they would not have voted for a candidate so clearly compromised by foreign interests. 

Tell the full story of death, destruction, arson, looting, and injured police of the post-George Floyd rioting and what emerges is not the MSNBC denial of violence or the August 2020 CNN lie of a “fiery but mostly peaceful” sort of idealistic protestors.

The Kavanaugh and Smollett fake news accounts helped further to tear apart the country and greenlighted the new assaults on the Supreme Court, from Senator Chuck Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) rants and threats to the would-be assassin who turned up near the Kavanaugh residence.

The Russian collusion hoax and the first impeachment media hysteria virtually ruined a presidency and have had grave foreign-policy consequences vis à vis Russia.

The media, moreover, matter-of-factly assumed Twitter was an arm of the Democratic Party. Mark Zuckerberg and the FBI worked together to suppress any news embarrassing to the Biden campaign. Do not expect much media coverage of Elon Musk’s serial disclosures of Twitter’s efforts to suppress free communications.

No thanks to the media, after nearly three years we are finally learning that the Wuhan Lab proved the likely source of the COVID pandemic and that the media-sainted Dr. Anthony Fauci subsidized gain-of-function viral research in Wuhan. 

Despite the lies, Americans assumed that Officer Brian Sicknick was not killed by Trump supporters as reported. The public shrugged “of course” when the media did its best to suppress the name of the Capitol policeman who lethally shot Ashli Babbitt for attempting to go through a broken window inside the Capitol. And on and on.

In sum, there is no media. It has ceased to exist, and the public plods on by assuming as true whatever the Pravda-like news outlets suppress and as false whatever they cover.

About Victor Davis Hanson

Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. He is an American military historian, columnist, a former classics professor, and scholar of ancient warfare. He has been a visiting professor at Hillsdale College since 2004. Hanson was awarded the National Humanities Medal in 2007 by President George W. Bush. Hanson is also a farmer (growing raisin grapes on a family farm in Selma, California) and a critic of social trends related to farming and agrarianism. He is the author most recently of The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won, The Case for Trump and the newly released The Dying Citizen.

Thursday, November 3, 2022

Musk Was Right: Bombshell Leak Reveals Fired Twitter Exec Met with Biden Admin to Discuss Censorship Plans

By Mike Landry November 1, 2022 

Here is a disturbing story. It demonstrates intrigue, corruption and disdain for American principles at the highest level.  Perhaps the saddest thing about this story is that you probably won’t be surprised. Especially if you’ve been paying attention for the past few years.  The story is this: Twitter and other social media platforms have been cozy with the Department of Homeland Security to squelch what DHS calls “misinformation,” “disinformation” and “malinformation,” or “MDM,” according to an investigative report published Monday by The Intercept...........To Read More....

My Take - Recently it was reported that Musk fired all the top executives, and did it before November 1, 2022, which means he doesn't  have to payout tens of millions in golden parachutes to these leftist misfits, if they were fired for cause.  I think qualifies as "cause". 

Friday, September 9, 2022

Over 50 Biden Administration Employees, 12 US Agencies Involved in Social Media Censorship Push: Document

By Zachary Stieber September 1, 2022

More than 50 officials in President Joe Biden’s administration across a dozen agencies have been involved with efforts to pressure Big Tech companies to crack down on alleged misinformation, according to documents released on Aug. 31.

Senior officials in the U.S. government, including White House lawyer Dana Remus, deputy assistant to the president Rob Flaherty, and onetime White House senior COVID-19 adviser Andy Slavitt, have been in touch with one or more major social media companies to try to get the companies to tighten rules on allegedly false and misleading information on COVID-19, and take action against users who violate the rules, the documents show.

In July 2021, for instance, after Biden said that Facebook was “killing people” by not combating misinformation effectively, an executive at Meta reached out to Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, a Biden appointee, to say that government and Meta teams met after the remarks “to better understand the scope of what the White House expects from us on misinformation going forward.”...........To Read More...


Wednesday, February 9, 2022

Facebook, other tech giants censor inconvenient facts about climate change

By Bjorn Lomborg February 7, 2022

The online world has become a free-speech battleground. Tech platforms have sided with illiberal regimes to censor posts while flagging “misinformation” in free countries. We all share a legitimate interest in avoiding outright falsehoods, but much censorship today — whether at dictators’ behest or in the name of eradicating “misinformation” — ultimately is about restricting discourse to a narrow corridor of the politically acceptable. That makes it harder to identify smart policies.

This is especially troubling for important issues like climate change. Global warming is real and man-made. However, social-media giants — Facebook in particular — are going far beyond censoring people for denying its existence.

Facebook monitors what people say about climate change in 100 countries and uses third-party fact-checkers to identify misinformation for flagging or removal...........To Read More....

Tuesday, August 10, 2021

Big Tech is Censoring Americans Using UN Law

August 08, 2021 @ Sultan Knish Blog

White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki warned that her administration was “flagging problematic posts for Facebook" and urged, "you shouldn't be banned from one platform and not others."

Psaki was not just advocating a theoretical approach, but discussing the shared infrastructure built by Big Tech monopolies, the United Nations and assorted governments for doing just that.

In his PJ Media article, Tyler O’Neil dug into the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT) which is funded by Google, Facebook, Microsoft and currently chaired by Twitter. Its advisory committee members include the United Nations, the European Union, and the British, French, and Canadian governments as well as the National Security Council in the U.S.

GIFCT had been set up by the industry in response to pressure from governments to remove Jihadist propaganda, but its Hash Sharing Consortium, a secret database of terrorism content to be immediately removed when its 13 dot com companies come across it, is secret, and so there's no way for anyone to know if they've been targeted and no appeal from the secret list.

The creation of a secret “No Fly List” for the internet by the biggest monopolies which control over 80% of social media content and much of the self-created video content on the internet would be troubling enough, but by 2019, Facebook, Twitter, Google, Microsoft, and Amazon had joined the Christchurch Call which advocates not just banning terrorist material, but fighting its root causes by strengthening "inclusiveness" and fighting "violent extremism".

To that end, the Dynamic Matrix of Extremisms and Terrorism (DMET) was deployed which goes through 4 different levels beginning with "partisanship" and ending with terrorism. DMET defines the initial levels of violent extremism as using "dehumanizing language" which can be described as nearly any criticism of a group.

Big Tech has built its own matrix. And we’re all in it.

As O'Neil documented the resulting “matrix” is a dangerous and bizarre list which classifies Sinn Fein and the Scottish National Party, alongside NARAL and "Anti-Vaxxers" as partisans on the first level of DMET. It's unclear what a top pro-abortion group, the ruling leftist party of Scotland, the political face for the IRA, and opponents of vaccination have in common, but out of such confusingly disparate material, Big Tech has built its censorship matrix.

At the second level, alongside Neo-Nazi groups like Combat 18, the Bundy Family (a family, not an organization) and the Animal Liberation Front, which actually is a terrorist organization, is Jihad Watch.

The respected counterterrorism blog by historian and researcher Robert Spencer and his associates (I have been among them) has been an invaluable resource for chronicling Islamic terrorism and colonialism and represents the opposite of violent extremism.

As Robert Spencer wrote on Jihad Watch, "This is pure libel. We have never advocated or approved of any violence or any illegal activity of any kind."

The DMET is just a more sophisticated pseudoscientific database of the kind that the Southern Poverty Law Center, whose materials have contributed to it, has deployed over the years.

One such database listed my blog, Sultan Knish, as a hate group, alongside a brand of gun oil, and a bar sign in Pennsylvania. These databases may have a Kafkaesque absurdity, but the consequences to lives, livelihoods, and careers are all too real with my blog showing up on the Color of Change list pressuring Big Tech monopolies to cut off funding and access to my site, as well as Jihad Watch, the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and many other conservative groups.

Big Tech companies have begun building their own databases in coordination with governments. And these secret databases determine who has access to the public square of the internet, who can earn a living, and who ends up being deplatformed and unpersoned.

“If we are ‘extremist,’ so is the U.S. Constitution, for we are trying to defend the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of all people before the law,” Robert Spencer wrote. But DMET, GFICT, and other interfaces between governments and tech monopolies aren’t using the Constitution. They’re censoring based on United Nations law.

When Facebook’s Oversight Board issued its verdict on censoring President Trump, it did not list a single item of United States law, including the First Amendment, but cited the Rabat Plan of Action, and articles of the UN's International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

GFICT’s DMET matrix cites the Rome Statue of the International Criminal Court to declare that preventing "dehumanization" is an "imperative under international law". Like Facebook’s decision to censor the former president, there’s no mention of the Constitution, but international law is repeatedly cited. Most disturbingly, a GFICT attempt to define terrorism collates a variety of definitions including attacks "against social cohesion" which the UN itself has noted is used to censor speech and political opponents as well as efforts to suppress Mohammed cartoons.

Tier 4 of the Content Taxonomy for what gets censored by Big Tech includes only one example targeting a group: “fear of Muslims is rational" thereby essentially banning most counterrorism, advocacy against unlimited immigration as well the Trump political campaign.

While Americans slept, Big Tech adopted UN standards to eliminate the Constitution.

Big Tech monopolies are no longer just enforcing local laws, moderating content in America or in the European Union based on the different standards in each country, instead all speech on the major platforms is being policed in line with the United Nations and its “international law”.

No black helicopters or blue helmets were needed. United Nations law came to the United States through the Big Tech monopolies that we turned over our speech and economy too.

Facebook now censors a former president in line with UN regulations. And censors all of us too.

GFICT is another example of UN regulations controlling our speech. We’re all drones living in the UN’s “Matrix” now as companies more powerful than governments impose international law.

Big Tech’s censorship matrix targets Robert Spencer and critics of Islam because censorship of dissenting religious views has been a longtime project of Islamic groups within the UN.

“They have all the power, and they mean to shut down dissent, and that means our days here are numbered,” Robert Spencer wrote. How long will it be until Did Muhammad Exist? Did An Inquiry into Islam's Obscure Origins, the newly revised and expanded version of Spencer's classic work, is censored the way that Amazon, which dominates the ebook market, suppressed Ryan T. Anderson’s When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment.

Libertarians and some establishment conservatives keep protesting that private companies have the right to censor whom they please. But the UN is the opposite of a private company.

When massive monopolies act in concert with governments and multinational alliances, like the EU and the UN, to eliminate free speech in line with UN international law, that’s not private action. If we don’t have the courage to confront the ‘matrix’ of big governments and Big Tech, of Google and the UN, or Amazon and the EU, we will lose our rights, our identity, and our nation. Tags: , , ,

Author Image

About Daniel Greenfield
Daniel Greenfield is a journalist investigating Islamic terrorism and the Left. He is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center

Related Posts:

 

Friday, July 23, 2021

Thank Goodness For Censors

July 22, 2021 by John Hinderaker in Biden Administration, Facebook, Free Speech

The Biden administration has enlisted Facebook to police conversations among Americans. This is because the rest of us are too dumb to be trusted, and may fall for “misinformation.” So how does Facebook carry out its mission of uplifting our discourse? By censoring conversation about hoes in gardening groups:

A group called WNY Gardeners has been repeatedly flagged by the social network for “violating community standards,” when its more than 7,500 members discussed the long-handled bladed implement, which is spelled with an “e,” unlike the offensive term.

When one member commented “Push pull hoe!” on a post about preferred weeding tools, Facebook sent a notification that read, “We reviewed this comment and found it goes against our standards for harassment and bullying,” a moderator said.

Bryan Preston comments:...........To Read More....

Tuesday, April 6, 2021

Supreme Court Justice Thomas Suggests Facebook, Twitter Could Be Regulated Like Utilities

By Jack Phillips April 5, 2021

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas appeared to signal that Big Tech firms could be regulated after Facebook and Twitter suspended President Donald Trump earlier this year.

Thomas, considered a conservative on the high court, made the point during a 12-page submission as the Supreme Court issued an order that rejected a lawsuit over Trump’s blocking of certain Twitter users from commenting on his posts before his account was taken down. The Supreme Court said the lawsuit ultimately should be dismissed as Trump isn’t in office anymore and was blocked from using Twitter, coming after the Second Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled against Trump.

“Today’s digital platforms provide avenues for historically unprecedented amounts of speech, including speech by government actors. Also unprecedented, however, is control of so much speech in the hands of a few private parties,” Thomas wrote Monday (pdf). “We will soon have no choice but to address how our legal doctrines apply to highly concentrated, privately owned information infrastructure such as digital platforms.”...........To Read More.....

Wednesday, March 3, 2021

Logical Fallacies are at the Heart of Social Media

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDdJXy3OAHLJn_MpiNbbpiEfmKMk5o52EaM_ErYTz_AQiD3zo-sQWOUuwWSVBiV4IJ3FlQV6T-I03A9NYvk-Cw_z_XUAGBaqiTjOITYXOGIJAACqAjGX9XDktXKqx-gc3w6FR9l1Ki6Us/w41-h54/My+Picture+2.jpg By Rich Kozlovich, Tags:

 I saw a piece on LinkedIn yesterday titled, How Social Media Works.  This followed:

I say that I prefer mangoes to oranges.

You say, so basically what you're saying is you hate oranges?  You also failed to mention pineapples, bananas, and grapefruits.  You need to educate yourself.  I'm literally shaking. 

What's the theme?  Logical fallacies, misdirection and self righteous moral outrage.  And all the first person said was they preferred mangoes over oranges!  

Well, that's the trend with all these social media trolls.  Logical fallacies, non sequiturs, misdirection and projection.  Very little logic or facts, especially on the topic being discussed. 

In dealing with these people it's important to read, study and understand logical fallacies and how to overcome them.  What 's a logical fallacy?  Here are three explanations:

  • A logical fallacy is an error in reasoning common enough to warrant a fancy name.
  • Fallacies are common errors in reasoning that will undermine the logic of your argument. Fallacies can be either illegitimate arguments or irrelevant points, and are often identified because they lack evidence that supports their claim.
  • A logical fallacy is an error in reasoning that renders an argument invalid. It is also called a fallacy, an informal logical fallacy, and an informal fallacy. All logical fallacies are non sequiturs—arguments in which a conclusion doesn't follow logically from what preceded it. 

Well, that all sounds clear as mud, so here's the real answer.  Logical fallacies are illogical ways of coming to conclusions.  It doesn't  mean the conclusion is wrong, it merely means the conclusion was reached in an illogical manner.  But it's more complicated that that because they're used so often to undermine actual logic and facts by use of what's called red herring fallacies, subtly changing the subject.  Misdirection.

However, they're all easy to overcome, but first you have to know them, and then you can  recognize them, and once recognized, you win!  And why do you win?  Because those using these tactics are deliberately being dishonest.  That's why you win!

Here's the list, and there's an awful lot of them.  Many of which are incomprehensible, and in point of fact, people who originated some of them can't explain them and those dealing with mathematics are truly incomprehensible, and some seem to be duplicates with small variations, as if they were developed at different time frames, and different geographies.

But there's hope.   There are about 140 logical fallacies with about 50 that should to be read and only 10 to 25 that really need to be understood as they're the ones that keep being repeated. 

Here's a site that says, 15 Logical Fallacies You Should Know Before Getting Into a Debate

Since misdirection (red herrings) and non sequiturs (unrelated or inaccurate statements) are already discussed, let's deal with the last two: Projection, and moral indignation!

Projection is when one party accuses another party of doing the very things they're doing themselves.  This is a common tactic from the left and is an unending corrupt hypocrisy used by leftists, Democrats, socialists, communists, academics....well.... you get the idea.  And we're seeing that being played out now more than ever from these leftist misfits.  It's a plague on the American landscape.  

But the worst of is the phony moral outrage of leftist snowflakes, expounding how your view makes them "shake" with emotional and moral outrage.  Well, I have the answer to that also.  

Who cares? Get a diaper!

 

Tuesday, January 19, 2021

Hungary Mulls Sanctions Against Social Media Giants

By Reuters January 19, 2021

Hungarian Justice Minister Judit Varga on Monday raised the prospect of sanctioning social media firms over what she called “systematic abuses” of free speech. The minister said she would meet the Hungarian competition watchdog this week to discuss possible penalties for what she described as unfair commercial practices as well as convening a meeting of the country’s digital freedom committee.

In a growing wave of criticism, some government officials are complaining about what they have described as efforts by social media companies, including Facebook, to limit conservative views on their platforms. Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s allies control large parts of the private media, allowing his agenda to be aired prominently.........To Read More.....

My Take- Interesting twist here, and quite frankly, I find this piece confusing.  While telling us social media is restricting conservative thought, they go on to tell us Orban, who is a former and current Prime Minister of Hungary and  a true anti-leftist, has control over the "private media".  What's that mean?  Does it mean he has a lot of followers in the private media, which he has, and is being restricted?  I read this piece three time and still find I'm not sure what the author's saying, other than it appears no one trusts the social media, which is now an extremely corrupt and powerful international political movement without restrictions or oversight.  

Monday, January 18, 2021

Curt Schilling: AIG Cancelled Our Insurance Due To My 'Social Media Profile'

Chris Menahan InformationLiberation Jan. 13, 2021

Famed Boston Red Sox pitcher-turned-conservative commentator Curt Schilling said Tuesday that American International Group (AIG) had cancelled his family's insurance plan due to his "social media profile."  "We will be just fine, but wanted to let Americans know that @AIGinsurance canceled our insurance due to my 'Social Media profile,'" Schilling said on Twitter.

Schilling shared a screenshot purportedly showing an AIG employee telling him that while they appreciate that he's been a "long time AIG client since 2004" "it was a management decision that was made collectively between underwriting and marketing teams that could not be overturned."....... 

Did a single person lose their insurance because they voiced support for the Black Lives Matter riots -- which the insurance industry themselves said were the most damaging riots in US history?   Did a single person involved in the riots lose their insurance?...............To Read More....

Sunday, October 6, 2019

Hillary Clinton Caught Paying Young Voters to Attend Her Rallies and Defend Her Online!

By Tim Brown

Among the many Wikileaks emails that were dumped this summer, it was clear that Hillary Clinton is not as popular as the media would have you believe. In fact, it became clear that she has no real support in a hacked email to the point where she was forced to pay young voters to stump online for her.  The Gateway Pundit reported: ......To Read More.....

Monday, August 12, 2019

Draft White House Executive Order Aimed at Social Media Companies Would Violate First Amendment

August 9, 2019 Competitive Enterprise Institute

Following yesterday’s Politico report about a draft executive order aimed at social media companies’ policies, CNN obtained a copy of the proposed order on Friday.

CEI President and CEO Kent Lassman said:
"Speech is inherently a matter of private action. It is walled off from government depredation by the First Amendment precisely because language is a rudiment of reason, the very mark of humanity that separates us from animals. It is unnatural to assign to another the responsibility to police speech. If launched as a genuine White House policy, this trial balloon will crash spectacularly as people learn of its implications beyond the narrow emotionally laden shouting matches of any given day. The only—legitimate and legal—restrictions on speech must flow from private not public action."
CEI Vice President for Policy Wayne Crews said:
“President Trump's proposed compelled speech executive action would require a significant government apparatus to oversee it, as would the legislative proposals we have seen from Republicans like Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO). If the right’s concern is the left’s presumed dominance of discourse, the remedies of treating Facebook, Google, Twitter and the like as monopolies or common carriers would worsen the problem. Requiring that they ‘certify objectivity’ will not protect the public nor conservative speech, but deliver the Internet into the administrative state’s clutches, as well as violate the First Amendment.  
“Administrative bodies equipped with such heft are a threat to public discourse;.......To Read More...

Friday, August 9, 2019

Two Outstanding Leftist Qualities: Insanity and Hubris

You will never understand bureaucracies until you understand that for bureaucrats procedure is everything and outcomes are nothing.  Thomas Sowell

By Rich Kozlovich

On Wednesday, August 7, 2019 Victor Morton posted an article in the Washington Times entitled,  "Twitter locks Mitch McConnell account over protest video", saying:
The reelection campaign of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell posted a video of protesters yelling obscenities and making threats toward “Massacre Mitch” at his Kentucky home. Twitter then locked the account, claiming the tweet violated its policy on violent threats. A Twitter spokesman told Politico on Wednesday night that the @Team_Mitch account was “temporarily locked out of their account for a Tweet that violated our violent threats policy, specifically threats involving physical safety.”
The arrogance and stupidity of this action boggles the mind.  Now in order for his account to be unlocked Mitch McConnell has to eliminate the video exposing those who are threatening he and his family at his home because it's a public safety issue?  Really?  You've got to be kidding!  Right?

So who exactly was McConnell threatening?   McConnell isn't threatening anyone!  It's he and his family who are the ones being threatened, at their home no less.  So exposing that is a public threat?  Really?  To whom? To the insane and violent leftist loons who are threatening him?

But one thing this action makes clear, the more they act in this manner the more clear it becomes how corrupt they are.  This will come back to haunt them in the near future.  As for now - Mitch  McConnell needs to sue them, if for no other reason than to have a huge expose about who and what they are. 

It isn't  violent threats they're concerned about, it's the truth that scares them.  Heaven forbid the public should see these misfits for who and what they are, and at some point the government is going to step in and impose rules or even break up these businesses. 

I've not been in favor of government oversight of the big tech social media oligarchs, and I'm not all that crazy about monopoly busting because these companies have become too big or too successful.  But we have to see this clearly. If we, as a society, can justify government interference in busting up businesses because they're too big, or preventing businesses from becoming bigger, at some point we will have to come to the conclusion public safety outweighs economics. 

The downside is government bureaucrats will become even more ridiculous than are the big tech oligarchs when they start making the rules.  They call these rules regulations, which carries the force of law, and before you know it, these unelected bureaucrats are out of control. 

The housing bubble that crashed the economy in 2008 was a direct result of the Community Reinvestment Act.  Here's the story.

 In 1977 the media discovered the word “redlining” and they used it like a whip. Redlining was supposed to be a racist action by the banks who wanted to prevent poor people and minorities, primarily black, from owning houses. Sounds insane doesn’t it? It is! Especially when a study came out showing that there was no redlining, that in fact these people were denied these loans because they were bad credit risks.

Yet redlining is what they had everyone believing, so in 1977 Congress, under the Carter administration, demanded that lending institutions pay attention to the “credit need” of the community and not on their ability to repay the loan and passing the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977.

Under this act the banks would be graded on how many of these bad loans they gave out. If they did business in this manner they received a high score. The score was directly proportionate to how easy it was to do a merger or an acquisition or even open a new branch and their ability to borrow money from the government. All of which the government controlled!

Under this act if some community activists, like the group ACORN, didn’t like the way you did business, they could cause all sorts of problems.  Stan J. Liebowitz, economics professor at the University of Texas at Dallas writes:
 "Home mortgages have been a political piñata for many decades. Greedy lenders aren’t the real reason for this mess. “In a nutshell, Liebowitz contends that the federal government over the last 20 years pushed the mortgage industry so hard to get minority homeownership up, that it undermined the country's financial foundation to achieve its goal."
Everyone was happy.  Everyone basked in the blaze of self congratulations. All of these bad loans were now declared to be “innovation lending” and they were praised by the regulators, academics and activists and because so much pressure was put on the lending institutions in the 90’s by the Clinton administration home ownership among minorities surged.

The media called this “one of the hidden success stories” of that administration. At one point the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston is supposed to have “produced a manual in the early '90s that warned mortgage lenders were to no longer deny urban and lower-income minority applicants on such "outdated" criteria as credit history, down payment or employment income.”

It was a real catch-22. If they continued giving out these bad loans, they would go out of business. If they didn’t comply there were real financial penalties, and if they raised interested rates they were accused of “predatory lending”.

Unfortunately this was undermining an entire economic system and the inevitable happened.

Jeff Jacoby notes:
"Trapped in a no-win situation entirely of the government's making, lenders could only hope that home prices would continue to rise, staving off the inevitable collapse. But once the housing bubble burst, there was no escape. Mortgage lenders have been bankrupted, thousands of subprime homeowners have been foreclosed on, and countless would-be borrowers can no longer get credit. The financial fallout has hurt investors around the world. And all of it thanks to the government, which was sure it understood the credit industry better than the free market did, and confidently created the conditions that made disaster unavoidable.”
That economic disaster was a direct response to government interference.   Interference caused by people with a political agenda who were totally unqualified to make decisions about anything involving banking, and probably much of anything else for that matter.  And they didn't care about the consequences because they had a mission.  

Leftists always have a mission, and mostly that mission involves getting conservatives to sign on to their power plays in the name of "public good".  So, now picture what happens when both the left and the right decide  the government should be deciding who can post on social media, and what can be posted.  Do we really think they'll be better than the big tech oligarchs in the long term?

Busting them up will only be a band aid fix.  What needs to happen is for a new social media platform come to the fore.  Let the market handle this, and even if it takes some time, which it will, that is the best fix possible. 

Competition!  Capitalism!  Everyone wants perfection, but the best we can hope for is the most acceptable imperfection.  The market is the most acceptable imperfection. 

Let's not let the emotions of the moment impact our long range thinking.  We need to see farther, deeper and wider than everyone else and recognize government interference in the social media will cause - not may cause, will cause - a long term problem that will not be fixable.

Friday, June 28, 2019

White House to Hold Social Media Summit Amid Trump Attacks

Margaret Harding McGill and Cristiano Lima, Politico, June 26, 2019

The White House will host “digital leaders” for a meeting next month amid President Donald Trump’s escalating attacks on Google, Facebook and Twitter.

The Social Media Summit set for July 11 will focus on the “opportunities and challenges of today’s online environment,” White House spokesperson Judd Deere said............

The announcement came the same day Trump said the federal government should file lawsuits against some of the tech giants. The president has accused Google, Facebook and Twitter of being biased against him and other conservatives—a charge the companies have repeatedly denied.
“Look, we should be suing Google and Facebook and all that, which, perhaps we will,” Trump said during a phone interview on Fox Business.

Trump has suggested the internet companies may run afoul of federal antitrust laws and floated possible enforcement action against them. Earlier this month, he suggested U.S. regulators should levy massive fines against the tech giants, saying “obviously there is something going on in terms of monopoly” in the sector.and Facebook."..............To Read More.....