Also indisputable is that Congress will be powerless to alter their behavior, with at least another two years of guaranteed gridlock preventing the removal of Big Tech’s exemption under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which says the online companies are like telecoms AT&T and Verizon (meaning they are protected from litigation) rather than news producers like the New York Times and Fox News (not protected from litigation).
Sure, you can expect more hearings like the one before the Senate Commerce Committee the week before Election Day, in which CEOs Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook), Sundar Pichai (Google) and Jack Dorsey (Twitter) were berated about their corporate underlings’ bias and censorship.
But it was just a repeat of previous Congressional theatrics: a lot of noise, and no action.… Read More ➡
Evidence of that – which had built up for weeks – turned into a flood over the last ten days.
What had been a quiet trend of sign-ups by publicly known conservatives – including many elected officials – turned into an out-and-out campaign to urge followers to join them in social media alternative platform Parler (originally “Par-lay” per the French spelling; apparently the English literal pronunciation is acceptable now too). According to report by Business Insider, tech data trackers said Parler reached No. 2 for Top News apps on the App Store.
“According to data Sensor Tower has provided to Business Insider, Parler has seen a 246% increase in US downloads this week compared with a week prior,” the site … Read More ➡
Following the death of George Floyd at the hands of an out-of-control Minneapolis police officer, and demonstrations mixed with riots across the country, many American corporations weighed in with official statements or financial support for causes – or both.
Unfortunately the involvement of some put them more on the side of divisiveness than unity, at a time when the country needs the latter the most.
Ultimately many of the companies and/or their top-ranking officers got behind (again) the dubious narrative that there is “systemic racism” in law enforcement, and that minorities are disproportionately treated as suspects – or singled out for violent police tactics – more than whites. As Manhattan Institute fellow Heather Mac Donald and former US Attorney Andrew McCarthy explained earlier this week, citing very convincing statistics, the idea there is structural bias in policing is a myth.
Twitter has twice muted the voice of prolifically tweeting President Donald Trump with a “fact-check” and another shielded post where he allegedly “glorified” violence against the thuggish rioters in Minneapolis (which he didn’t).
But groups and individuals who identify with Antifa, the anarchists who agitate for violence and destruction — most recently following the excessive police force death of George Floyd in Minneapolis — have been allowed to spread their destructive messages on Twitter.
Sure, the platform suspended the account of one such group, but dozens — if not hundreds — more spout their disruptive anarchist garbage on the site, provoking followers to violent resistance against authorities.
You may not threaten violence against an individual or a group of people. We also prohibit the glorification of violence. Learn more about our violent threat and glorification of violence policies…You may not threaten or
The Wuhan virus has presented the left-leaning Big Tech companies yet another opportunity to burnish their reputations for censorship of conservatives and independent thinkers.
They have seized that opportunity.
To be sure, Google/YouTube, Facebook and Twitter have allowed much speech and activity on their platforms that dissents from official government advisories and loyal liberal orthodoxy to such. But whatever the techs’ standards are, they are applied inconsistently.
The latest, largest, and likely most egregious example is a video interview with two Bakersfield, Calif. physicians, Drs. Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi, by KERO-TV, in which the medical professionals expressed skepticism about the threat of the virus to the public, following their own experiences and analysis of various data about the disease. After earning more than 5 million views in just a few days, and getting the broader attention of the national media, Google-owned … Read More ➡
Twitter’s bias and inconsistencies in applying its rules and standards are getting ridiculous.
While Chinese government mouthpiece Zhao Lijian – who accused the U.S. military of being the source of the Wuhan virus outbreak – remains on the platform spouting propaganda, American users are being censored or shut down over alleged coronavirus “misinformation,” and for running afoul of the Left’s transgender agenda.
Lynnette Hardaway and Rochelle Richardson, who have become online celebrities with their entertaining pro-Trump duologues as “Diamond and Silk,” found their account blocked Wednesday after Twitter said they violated their rules, because they supposedly misled the public about public policy and how people should respond to the COVID-19 pandemic.
“The only way we can become immune to the environment; we must be out in the environment,” the rule-breaking tweet said. “Quarantining people inside of their houses for extended periods will make people sick!”
China is lying and propagandizing on social media (again!), and now because it is about the deeply troubling and threatening worldwide Wuhan virus pandemic, two members of Congress want the nation’s leaders banned from Twitter.
Should they be?
In a letter dated March 20th, Republican Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska and GOP Rep. Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin urged Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey to remove Chinese Communist Party officials from the platform because they are “using Twitter to disseminate propaganda in the midst of a dangerous global crisis.”
“While the coronavirus pandemic is afflicting families, governments, and markets around the world, the Chinese Communist Party is waging a massive propaganda campaign to rewrite the history of COVID-19 and whitewash the Party’s lies to the Chinese people and the world,” Gallagher and Sasse wrote.
The prime example that many have referred to is a March 12th tweet by Zhao Lijian, a spokesman … Read More ➡
With the first implementation of a new policy that purports to promote transparency in labeling videos that have been edited in ways that could be deceptive or misleading, Twitter couldn’t have succeeded better in making transparent its own liberal bias.
Last weekend the social media platform marked a video posted by White House social media director Dan Scavino, and retweeted by President Trump, as “manipulated media.” The label had never before been used, although Twitter warned that it was coming.
The video showed a clip of a speech by Democratic presidential frontrunner Joe Biden in his own stumbling words, which were cropped to make it appear he was endorsing Trump. The Democratic National Committee called attention to Twitter that the video was “manipulated,” according to The Daily Beast, and Twitter immediately slapped the label on it.
“This is an example of our ongoing disinformation work, … Read More ➡
Last week’s polar opposite decisions on the handling of political advertisements by Facebook and Twitter have predictably exposed the anti-free speech tendencies of the Left.
The former announced it would allow candidate and issue ads and exempt them from the platform’s fact-checking operation that it employs for news reports.
The latter said it would ban political advertisements altogether.
Advertisers crave access to Facebook’s users far more than Twitter’s, mostly because it is easy to specify target audiences (for example, those who “Like” Donald Trump). But both social media operations are desirable for politicians and activists to get their messages out, even for Republicans who complain about Facebook’s admitted anti-conservative bias, because they are an effective tool to reach desired voters.
The rationale given by Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey for his decision shows a mindset that helps explain why his business was not profitable until recently.
One of the more noxious aspects of anti-Trump radicalism is the growing practice of obtaining private information on public figures for the purpose of mobilizing large-scale harassment campaigns against them. The practice is known as “doxxing.” It’s highly illegal. Yet it thrives largely because of tacit encouragement from social media sites. That raises a couple of questions: Are social media companies willfully enabling such behavior? And if not, are they at least taking steps to discourage it? So far, their action has been underwhelming.
Doxxers tend to be a self-righteous lot, possessed of moral indignation against supposed perpetrators of injustice. They also are prone to viewing themselves as above the law. Case in point: Jackson Cosko, age 27, a former Senate staffer arrested last October for posting home addresses, phone numbers and other personal information about five senators, including Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. and Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, whom he claimed … Read More ➡