- Facebook and Twitter admit to censoring.
- Big media are blocking small news agencies, Christians and the right.
- A First Amendment Lawyer says Facebook censoring is a dangerous proposition.
- Facebook blocks 'call to prayer' for the President.
The question begs: Is it really happening?
Are media giants like Facebook and Twitter censoring rhe right, smaller news companies and the public? Are they censoring Christians? Are they censoring the left equally? With algorithms now controlling everything said, we now also have machines controlling our conversations, our very lives.
Let’s weigh the obvious. This article will attempt to prove the claims of many that big media is absolutely censoring a great many organizations and the public including, but not limited to: Christian opinions, churches, church organizations, smaller news agencies, journalists, activist organizations, and the general public. Does their censoring of the people’s rights line up with the Constitution?
Mark Zuckerberg’s comments: notice how he contradicts himself:
“Reducing the spread of false news on Facebook is a responsibility that we take seriously.”
Has Facebook hired it’s own journalists? A research team maybe? How do they know what is fake news and what isn’t?
“We also recognize that this is a challenging and sensitive issue. We want to help people stay informed without stifling productive public discourse.”
Stifling? Uh huh.
“There is also a fine line between false news and satire or opinion.”
Opinion? Are we entitled to an opinion?
“For these reasons, we don’t remove false news from Facebook, but instead, significantly reduce its distribution by showing it lower in the News Feed.”
According to the Constitution, and law, this is Facebook and Twitter blatantly saying they will destroy anyone that doesn’t share their opinion, putting smaller and struggling organizations, Independent Journalists, and those that don’t share their views out of business. No exceptions.
So who is the judge of which news articles are “false news”? Who is the judge of who is speaking or writing hate speech, or even what is considered hate speech? If we are to give such abilities to anyone at all, should it not be a governing body, and not private individuals and private companies? Has big social media bought our government? After all, if a Christian preacher speaks out against false God’s, to whom ever it is, is he not exercising his Constitutional and God given rights? He also has the right to an opinion just as Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey.
Even Congress does not have the right to censor free speech, unless that speech is harming another person physically, and as long as it is an opinion that is able to withstand any objectionable opinion by others. It doesn’t cover private business entities per say, it covers individuals. Yet the left controlled House of Representatives is doing so by appointing big social media and private companies to be the overseers of everything people say.
Speech is an expression of opinion. It is ‘words.’ Actions are an expression, but actions are not covered in the free speech amendment clause. So if we see people running naked through our streets it is an act of expression, it has nothing to do with free speech. It is by all means considered a crime of “indecent exposure.” It is still the congressional left taking away free speech, and adding to free speech what they consider freedom of expression. Are we hearing in the news that Democrats are being censored? No. If they were, they would be screaming loud and clear.
They will let people run the streets of America naked, and harbor illegal immigrants (which is breaking federal, and state laws do not preempt federal laws in these cases), but they will readily take free speech ‘words’ and opinions away from the general public and many organizations, and force socialist tyranny upon the population. They like to throw around the word Fascist, but this is what actual fascists do. This is not the personal opinion of one person, but rather the opinion of millions.
Where the laws are concerned, this is extreme censorship by a private organization that has placed itself as a godly or kingly entity, openly telling the United States citizens through a strong financial takeover, “We are in control of everything you say and do, and we are so big there is nothing you can do about it.” (Hello? Mr. President!?)
The problem here is, just who is doing the judging? If big social media is in control of the matter then truth certainly won’t get out there, especially when they are biased toward one political party.
The public will only be told what they want the public to know, and the government should have already stepped up to defend civil liberities in a more direct and detailed manner.
The left is continually pointing fingers at Trump and falsely claiming Russian collusion while they: collude with the giant social media companies and taking away the rights of the United States citizens; and collude with illegal immigrants, harboring, aiding and abetting, allowing illegal immigrants to vote (which are federal crimes). The left points their fingers at the right while they break so many constitutional laws it’s disheartening to patriots and no one is holding them responsible or putting them in jail, or removing them from office. States do not preempt the Federal Government.
Speaking on illegal immigration, let it be known that many are crossing the northern border of the United States and no one takes notice because the public’s attention is directed to the Mexico border. Those crossing the northern border are primarily of the Islam faith and gathering in compounds across the United States, making ready for conversions.
May 2019: “Facebook censoring hate speech and bigotry is a “dangerous proposition” says a First Amendment lawyer, because the social media giant with more than 2 billion users is exercising its power to decide who gets to speak and who doesn’t get to speak. Alex Abdo of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University says perhaps the more significant issue is the Facebook algorithm that, for business reasons, pushes shocking or offensive content onto people’s news feed because they are more likely to engage with it.
Entrapment shown here is to set up for banning or blocking.
Earlier this week, after years of pressure to crack down on hate and bigotry, Facebook banned Louis Farrakhan, Alex Jones and other extremists, saying they violated its ban on “dangerous individuals.” The company also removed right-wing personalities Paul Nehlen, Milo Yiannopoulos, Paul Joseph Watson and Laura Loomer, along with Jones’ site, Infowars.
The latest bans apply to both Facebook’s main service and to Instagram and extend to fan pages and other related accounts. Decreed as censorship by several of those who got the ax, the move signals a renewed effort by the social media giant to remove people and groups promoting objectionable material such as so-called hate, racism and anti-Semitism.
Yet the ‘right’ has no equal chance at delivering opinions. Facebook has previously suspended Jones from its flagship service temporarily; now this suspension is permanent and includes Instagram. Twitter has also banned Loomer, Jones and Yiannopoulos, though Farrakhan, the leader of the Nation of Islam long known for provocative comments widely considered to be anti-Semitic, still had an account Thursday, as does Congresswoman Ilhan Omar and other left extremists. Facebook said the newly banned accounts violated its policy against dangerous individuals and organizations, listing them as such for voicing their opinions.
Jack Dorsey, founder and CEO of Twitter has this to say about his biased censoring of the public and government officials, to include the President. Notice how he contradicts himself:
“Our highest priority is to protect the health of the public conversation on Twitter, and an important part of that is ensuring our rules and how we enforce them are easy to understand. In the past, we’ve allowed certain Tweets that violated our rules to remain on Twitter because they were in the public’s interest, but it wasn’t clear when and how we made those determinations. To fix that, we’re introducing a new notice that will provide additional clarity in these situations, and sharing more on when and why we’ll use it. Serving the public conversation includes providing the ability for anyone to talk about what matters to them; this can be especially important when engaging with government officials and political figures. By nature of their positions these leaders have outsized influence and sometimes say things that could be considered controversial or invite debate and discussion. A critical function of our service is providing a place where people can openly and publicly respond to their leaders and hold them accountable. With this in mind, there are certain cases where it may be in the public’s interest to have access to certain Tweets, even if they would otherwise be in violation of our rules. On the rare occasions when this happens, we’ll place a notice – a screen you have to click or tap through before you see the Tweet – to provide additional context and clarity. We’ll also take steps to make sure the Tweet is not algorithmically elevated on our service, to strike the right balance between enabling free expression, fostering accountability, and reducing the potential harm caused by these Tweets.”
In other words, they are taking the names of those that converse with their “deplorables” list.
Facebook co-founder, Chris Hughes, said in an interview on CNBC on June 17th that he is calling for the breakup of the company. He also said that Zuckerberg and others have become too powerful and unaccountable to the government and it’s shareholders.
On May 15th, in an interview on Fox News, Michelle Malkin, a conservative commentator, said Facebook and big media have their thumb on the censor button.
Committeewoman Harmeet Dhillon said in an interview with Fox Business, Cavutto on May 3rd that Facebook has become very dangerous.
She goes on to say that “Anyone that is following those that big media is censoring or shares or retweets what they say will more than likely be banned or blocked also.” This has been proven as fact. We already know they are after the public for sharing views and opinions.
On June 12th, Reuters reported that 200,000 Saudi’s abruptly left the Twitter platform for their censoring issues, and went to the more conservative platform Parler. So we see the censoring isn’t just on American individuals and organizations but on a global scale.
Tucker Carlson, (a must see) said on May 3rd:
“Zuckerberg is prescribing which opinions the public is allowed to have, and that Zuckerberg’s claim of hate speech is only against those that don’t share Zuckerberg’s agenda.”
Vikram Kumar, a whistleblower and content specialist has some very interesting insight about how the top media giants are ousting smaller media outlets and Journalist’s, and organizations poised on the right, including those with a Christian view. He has some very factual allegations that have already been proven as truth.
(Premiered Jun 13, 2019)
Facebook recently took down a video by Graham Allen where he discussed a Pastor who prayed over President Trump. Facebook called it “hate speech” to call on people to pray for the President of the United States. It is hard to deny that big tech censorship is ratcheting up their censorship of conservatives.
I firmly believe that any/all journalists should be unbiased in their writing, and should base any personal opinion on their articles, on the facts found in their research, and not based on what the company wants them to say. I have been blessed to be a part of news platform over the last six months that asks contributors to keep personal opinion in any given article to less than 20% (Communal News). Every News outlet should abide by the same.
These are but a few of my own articles that have been blocked by Facebook and declared by Facebook to be hate speech, within minutes to a couple of hours of their posting, even though absolute truth is found in each article. I am not biased to any political party or groups, I simply vote for who has the best interest of the United States at heart, and which the general public has every right to read of and to voice their own opinions. I will be voting for Donald Trump.
Anyone caring to read these articles will find absolute truth in the research and writing of them (with some accounting given to federal laws), whether they are Democrats or Republicans.
This will be my last article as an independent journalist Mr. President. I’m starving, I quit. You have all the proof of the matter.
May God have mercy on us all.