What Kent Brandenburg writes in the following article is sadly the truth of the reality for all of us living in the West.
Censorship
All posts tagged Censorship
Since YouTube will censure those things they do not believe is true or might be a “conspiracy” you must watch this before they censor it!
How do you think this will go? https://reclaimthenet.org/google-faster-adaptable-censorship-2024-elections
When should one’s freedom of speech be censored?
Personally, I do not believe one’s right to speak should be censored! Now, I do NOT accept the climate scam scare because I believe Genesis 8:22. I also do not believe the pushers of the climate scam believe it either. If they did they would not fly to Dubai by the thousands in fossil fuel airplanes to discuss the very reason for their existence. The climate scam is just another lie of the ultimate liar, Satan himself and many elites have swallowed that lie along with many of his other lies. 2Timothy 3:13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.
This is an email I received this morning from The Gatestone Institute concerning social media’s censorship!
‘It is not news that social media and Big Tech are targeting conservative content. Under new management, Twitter has moved to lessen its suppression, but aside from that, it is business as usual. A shocking but unsurprising incident occurred just this week. Gatestone set up an account on Mastodon, a social media service modeled on Twitter. We then posted an excerpt from a recent article, linking to it. Within a half hour, Mastodon permanently suspended our account, stating:
Reason: Content violates the following community guidelines
• Do not share intentionally false or misleading information
What alleged “false or misleading information” merited us a lifetime ban? This single sentence, from an important recent report by Gatestone senior fellow Uzay Bulut:
“The criminal practice of trafficking and abusing hundreds of thousands of migrant children who cross the southern border is now, thanks to the open-border policy of the Biden Administration, apparently ‘normal’ inside the US.”‘
Praise the Lord there is one thing they cannot censor and that is the Word/Words of the living God! 2Timothy 2:9 …but the word of God is not bound or CENSORED!!!!!!!!!!!!
Is my blog “Disinformation”? How do I or you discern what is true or disinformation? Will an “expert” that has been trained at Harvard be the one I should or can trust on this?
- ‘Harvard’s in-house censorship journal published an article declaring the field of “mis- and disinformation studies” to be “too big to fail” and “here to stay.”
- Citing government funding to academic departments who study how to optimize online censorship, the Harvard magazine embraced language from the 2008 financial crisis language reserved for major banks.
- The Harvard authors openly acknowledged the troubling links between today’s censorship regime and civil liberties violations during 1950s Cold War propaganda efforts.’ https://foundationforfreedomonline.com/harvard-too-big-to-fail/
- Republicans’ first order of business this coming 118th Congress must be to introduce a legislative firewall between the White House — and its offshoot federal law enforcement agencies such as the Department of Justice and its offshoot, the FBI — and private social media companies.
- The dissemination of news and the facilitation of public discourse is central in any democracy that allows genuine participation on the part of its citizens. Open public dialogue is a “public good”, or something which, like clean air, benefits everyone equally and greatly.
- Providers of public goods are generally regulated under common carriage laws. The Communications Act of 1934, for instance, allowed AT&T to enjoy monopolistic power over the public good it provided: the interconnecting of the American people by way of a unified, national standard for telephone communication.
- In exchange for enjoying monopoly power, and to ensure that public goods truly remain beneficial to the public, special duties or restraints are generally imposed on such companies.
- With companies such as Compuserve and AOL in mind, Congress sought to hand out special liability relief with the idea of promoting two public goods: an internet characterized by a wide dissemination and diversity of ideas; and an incentive system for platforms to create family-friendly environments.
- Unfortunately, in the ensuing case law that has been built up in dealing with Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, two giant, related problems have emerged, both involving a misreading of a landmark court decision: Zeran v. AOL.
- The first problem is that what Congress intended when it comes to protecting social media companies from liability tied to defamatory messages posted on their platforms has been greatly expanded and now encompasses virtually any and all decisions regarding “content moderation”, such as removing the accounts of epidemiologists with whom Dr. Anthony Fauci, the FBI, CIA, and possibly other federal agencies, might disagree.
- The second problem is that the “good faith” condition Congress imposed on these companies to ensure against arbitrary or biased content-removal decisions has been completely erased. It is now never applied to social media companies at all.
- Both problems can be traced to a misunderstanding and incomplete reading of Zeran v. AOL.
- As a result, as Michigan State University law professor and former Commerce Department telecom official Adam Candeub writes, “social media platforms are now treated like they’re above the law.”
- Thankfully, this can be easily changed, even at the regulatory level. Non-discrimination policies need not create a “wild west” scenario. To a large extent, people really do not need moderators to curate what they see on social media. They are free to do that themselves.
- Removing the distortive “curators”, editors, “fact-checkers” and middlemen from the information process — and reaching people who previously have been sheltered from diverse opinions — will likely not tear people apart. It might even help to bridge misunderstandings and fill in a few gaps. That, perhaps, is the ultimate public good.https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/19261/big-tech-censorship
I couldn’t even remember posting the video MAGA. Anyway, the people at YouTube found it some way after being online for one year. They let me know their deletion of the video 29 April of this year. They wrote “
| We wanted to let you know our team reviewed your content, and we think it violates our misinformation policy. We know you may not have realized this was a violation of our policies, so we’re not applying a strike to your channel. However, we have removed the following content from YouTube: |
| Video: MAGA |
| We realize this may be disappointing news, but it’s our job to make sure that YouTube is a safe place for all. If you think we’ve made a mistake, you can appeal this decision – you’ll find more details below. |
That video only had six views and had been online for ONE YEAR! Yep, YouTube IS KEEPING US SAFE!
whatyareckon 