Paradox
©
Fisana

Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Censorship and the media


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 2,887 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 01 November 2020 - 07:21 AM

I took a break from Joe and upon return was pleasantly surprised with the good guest this week. Gad Saad was fun to listen to and the Glen Greenwald was a good discussion as well. Of course a wide range of topics in a three hour discussion. From Ed snowden to the current climate of journalism. One part that comes to mind is where Glen talks about walking around with all those US government secrets in his back pocket for fear of leaving them anywhere but on his person. What a crazy time in his life, it sure makes sense why he is currently living in Brazil

 

Feels fitting this week with the actions of big teck banning the NY post article for what appeared to be political reasons. Twitter has taken a weak sorry we made a mistake stance by changing their policy and allowing the NY post to sign in, accept the policy and re post the story. Their claim that it was hacked source was inaccurate and made clear by the policy change and allowing them to repost he story. Why they could not simply unblock the account seems like a strange power move but could just be legality due to the policy change. Additionally this week Glen felt that he was pushed out of his own publication for political censorship.

 

It's a good eye opener for anyone who hasn't listened to him before

 

[Direct Link]


Edited by FLASHINGROOSTER, 01 November 2020 - 07:22 AM.


#2 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 2,887 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 01 November 2020 - 08:20 AM

Fake news is going to be the line of the decade. At first it seemed like just a way for Trump to shrug off negative criticism, then it appeared to morph into actual fake news, and again into a way to censor information

 



#3 Microbe

Microbe

    civis scientiam

  • OG VIP
  • 4,637 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 01 November 2020 - 02:10 PM

Fake news is going to be the line of the decade. At first it seemed like just a way for Trump to shrug off negative criticism, then it appeared to morph into actual fake news, and again into a way to censor information

The media is responsible for 90% of the shit show this year. Even worst the cowards and sheeple are willing to bow down. Take the hyped up covid shit.......we starved and froze to death in the wilderness fighting the most powerful and largest military force for our freedom and cowards and sheeple are willing to give it up over a over hyped virus. Give me liberty or give me death fucking period and i will die fighting for my freedom you can believe that!
  • xlcor likes this

#4 Juthro

Juthro

    dope smoking hillbilly

  • OG VIP
  • 9,556 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 01 November 2020 - 06:38 PM

Over 9 million cases, and over 230 thousand people dead is hardly hyped up COVID shit my friend.  I think the cowards are the people that are ignoring the facts, and science, and instead just scream political rhetoric.     And if you think I'm a sheeple, or a coward because of the way I think, you would be making a major mistake.

 

And anyone using Jimmy Dore to complain about biased media coverage, and misinformation loses all credibility with me.  That guy is a shock jock, and an entertainer.  He plays to his audience for a living, and he is not now, nor has he ever been a reporter of unbiased news.  

 

 


  • mushit, riseabovethought and Baphom3t like this

#5 Microbe

Microbe

    civis scientiam

  • OG VIP
  • 4,637 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 02 November 2020 - 06:39 AM

Over 9 million cases, and over 230 thousand people dead is hardly hyped up COVID shit my friend. I think the cowards are the people that are ignoring the facts, and science, and instead just scream political rhetoric. And if you think I'm a sheeple, or a coward because of the way I think, you would be making a major mistake.

And anyone using Jimmy Dore to complain about biased media coverage, and misinformation loses all credibility with me. That guy is a shock jock, and an entertainer. He plays to his audience for a living, and he is not now, nor has he ever been a reporter of unbiased news.

You really believe those numbers do you? Also if you don't think that the covid was a political ploy, you are mistaken 'Friend' and are a victim of the media.

#6 Juthro

Juthro

    dope smoking hillbilly

  • OG VIP
  • 9,556 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 02 November 2020 - 01:17 PM

 

Over 9 million cases, and over 230 thousand people dead is hardly hyped up COVID shit my friend. I think the cowards are the people that are ignoring the facts, and science, and instead just scream political rhetoric. And if you think I'm a sheeple, or a coward because of the way I think, you would be making a major mistake.

And anyone using Jimmy Dore to complain about biased media coverage, and misinformation loses all credibility with me. That guy is a shock jock, and an entertainer. He plays to his audience for a living, and he is not now, nor has he ever been a reporter of unbiased news.

You really believe those numbers do you? Also if you don't think that the covid was a political ploy, you are mistaken 'Friend' and are a victim of the media.

 

 

Between my wife, and I, we have had three elderly family members that have had to hospitalised due to covid, 2 had to be put on ventilators, and one of those did not recover.  He passed one month shy of being able to see his first born grandchild.   So while I'm happy that you or yours haven't experienced it personally, I can say with certainty that your media hype story is full of shit.


Edited by Juthro, 02 November 2020 - 06:43 PM.

  • Baphom3t and ElPirana like this

#7 ElPirana

ElPirana

    Mycotopiate

  • Gold VIP
  • 935 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 02 November 2020 - 01:42 PM

Over 9 million cases, and over 230 thousand people dead is hardly hyped up COVID shit my friend. I think the cowards are the people that are ignoring the facts, and science, and instead just scream political rhetoric. And if you think I'm a sheeple, or a coward because of the way I think, you would be making a major mistake.
And anyone using Jimmy Dore to complain about biased media coverage, and misinformation loses all credibility with me. That guy is a shock jock, and an entertainer. He plays to his audience for a living, and he is not now, nor has he ever been a reporter of unbiased news.

You really believe those numbers do you? Also if you don't think that the covid was a political ploy, you are mistaken 'Friend' and are a victim of the media.

Between my wife, and I, we have had three elderly family members that have had to hospitalised due to covid, 2 had to be put on ventilators, and one of them did not recover. He passed one month shy of being able to see his first born grandchild. So while I'm happy that you or yours haven't experienced it personally, I can say with certainty that your media hype story is full of shit.
There’s something to this. My wife and I were both a little skeptical early on. Then a couple months ago her dad died after getting covid. Then just after that, my boss’ dad got it...he passed away too. Then my boss’ sister got it and just last Thursday I found out my boss tested positive too.

I think all the other fake news out there, all the other BS that we have to wade through on any number of subjects, makes us naturally skeptical. But when it starts hitting close to home and the people you love that are around you are profoundly affected, you realize it is real.

And sorry for your loss Juthro, I hope you and your family doesn’t have to go through this again any time soon.

Edited by ElPirana, 02 November 2020 - 01:45 PM.

  • Baphom3t, Juthro and FLASHINGROOSTER like this

#8 riseabovethought

riseabovethought

    innerspace explorer

  • App Administrator
  • 4,227 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 02 November 2020 - 01:53 PM

I really can relate to what Juthro said.  I think those guys are assholes too, and cowards...for not being able to confront reality with eyes open, and for not protecting the women and children and elderly, strictly on instinct alone.  I feel sad that my fellow humans have fallen so low.  Its a sad time to witness. 


  • Baphom3t and Juthro like this

#9 Juthro

Juthro

    dope smoking hillbilly

  • OG VIP
  • 9,556 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 02 November 2020 - 02:23 PM

Does anyone else remember a time when it wasn't this way?  When you could have fundamental differences of opinion with people, and not have to make them the enemy?

 

[Direct Link]


  • Baphom3t likes this

#10 Severian

Severian

    Mycotopiate

  • VIP
  • 406 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 02:30 PM

Though, it's not suprising at all, given the general completely willful blind eye to the 'placebo' effect that no one has drawn the connection between covid and the same.

 

In certain ''backwards''  (quotes used in complete sarcasm) countries, people who have been cursed will all of a sudden die of no natural causes

 

In certain "forwards" countries; it's been statistically shown that the manner in which a doctor gives news of a supposedly terminal illness to a patient will have a direct relationship to whether or not a person recovers

 

Also; people who go in for a clinical study for a new chemotherapy drug, given a placebo (ie no radiation), Some people have their hair fall out.

 

I could go on, but the point is, that the mind-body connection is so incredibly strong, that people can cause themselves to become sick

 

Not only that, but they can cause themselves to die as well.

 

Even if COVID is all hype, ie , the virus isn't anything to worry about, with the amount of insane fearmongering the media is putting out there, it's no suprise that there are a bunch of people dying. Because they believe that this is some deadly world ending pandemic.

 

I'd love to see stats on where all of these people dying of 'covid' were getting their news.

 

And, sorry to hear about your family. But again, it's more likely that the media killed them than covid did.



#11 Juthro

Juthro

    dope smoking hillbilly

  • OG VIP
  • 9,556 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 02 November 2020 - 03:01 PM

Even if COVID is all hype, ie , the virus isn't anything to worry about, with the amount of insane fearmongering the media is putting out there, it's no suprise that there are a bunch of people dying. Because they believe that this is some deadly world ending pandemic.

 

I'd love to see stats on where all of these people dying of 'covid' were getting their news.

 

And, sorry to hear about your family. But again, it's more likely that the media killed them than covid did.

 

Brother, you don't have a damn clue as to what your talking about here.  Have you dealt with the virus first hand?  Have you, or a loved one caught it?  If not, then you have no basis except political misinformation to work with, and I reject your claims as ignorant, and misguided at best.  The media didn't kill 230 thousand people here in the US, and anyone who thinks that is a fool.

 

And for the record, the members of my family that got sick, including the one that died were all dyed in the wool, red hat wearing COVID deniers who all went to a super spreader religious retreat in Idaho.  It's because they refused to follow any social distancing guidelines, and they they bought into stupid shit like your spreading here that they got sick.


Edited by Juthro, 02 November 2020 - 06:42 PM.

  • Baphom3t and Moonless like this

#12 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 2,887 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 02 November 2020 - 05:52 PM

 

 

And anyone using Jimmy Dore to complain about biased media coverage, and misinformation loses all credibility with me.  That guy is a shock jock, and an entertainer.  He plays to his audience for a living, and he is not now, nor has he ever been a reporter of unbiased news.  

 

For the record he never claims to be anything more than a "Jag off comedian" usually say's it once or twice a show
 



#13 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 2,887 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 02 November 2020 - 06:22 PM

[Direct Link]



#14 Juthro

Juthro

    dope smoking hillbilly

  • OG VIP
  • 9,556 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 02 November 2020 - 06:41 PM

 

 

 

And anyone using Jimmy Dore to complain about biased media coverage, and misinformation loses all credibility with me.  That guy is a shock jock, and an entertainer.  He plays to his audience for a living, and he is not now, nor has he ever been a reporter of unbiased news.  

 

For the record he never claims to be anything more than a "Jag off comedian" usually say's it once or twice a show
 

 

 

So then you understand why I object to clips of his show being used as would be serious political commentary.

 

And for what it's worth JImmy wanted to be a Jag off comedian, but it didn't pay the bills.  So now he does what he does, and makes a hell of a living off of it.



#15 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 2,887 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 02 November 2020 - 07:14 PM

Before I gave Jimmy a chance I even said the same thing to Alder. That I didn't think he was good very good at either comedy or politics. I have warmed up to him and he's starting to make more sense now. On that discussion with Joe and Glenn Greenwald they made an interesting point how they had made these assumptions about each other. Joe sort of wrote him off as a super progressive and Glenn said when Joe's name was mentioned he would go, oh is that the guy that has all the alt right assholes on his show and hates trans. Then they both described that after actually paying attention to each other they came to realize those assumptions were not true at all.

 

It makes a good point how we write people off really easily. Some might see it as a joke show but others do not.

 

Regardless you are free to your opinion's brother

 

You had me wondering what he does make, a quick search turned up some estimation site. I take it with a grain of salt but they estimate somewhere around 3-10K a month depending on the month.

 

https://us.youtubers...imated-earnings


Edited by FLASHINGROOSTER, 02 November 2020 - 07:14 PM.


#16 Microbe

Microbe

    civis scientiam

  • OG VIP
  • 4,637 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 03 November 2020 - 07:19 PM

Over 9 million cases, and over 230 thousand people dead is hardly hyped up COVID shit my friend. I think the cowards are the people that are ignoring the facts, and science, and instead just scream political rhetoric. And if you think I'm a sheeple, or a coward because of the way I think, you would be making a major mistake.

And anyone using Jimmy Dore to complain about biased media coverage, and misinformation loses all credibility with me. That guy is a shock jock, and an entertainer. He plays to his audience for a living, and he is not now, nor has he ever been a reporter of unbiased news.

You really believe those numbers do you? Also if you don't think that the covid was a political ploy, you are mistaken 'Friend' and are a victim of the media.

Between my wife, and I, we have had three elderly family members that have had to hospitalised due to covid, 2 had to be put on ventilators, and one of those did not recover. He passed one month shy of being able to see his first born grandchild. So while I'm happy that you or yours haven't experienced it personally, I can say with certainty that your media hype story is full of shit.
Sorry for your loss brother.

#17 Juthro

Juthro

    dope smoking hillbilly

  • OG VIP
  • 9,556 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 03 November 2020 - 08:00 PM

Sorry for your loss brother.

 

Thank you.


  • Microbe likes this

#18 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 2,887 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 26 November 2020 - 08:58 PM

Anyone else find it odd that youtube felt the need to attach a new permanent banner on the bottom of the video player that pops up on any political themed video, I could be watching a video of Justin Trudeau talk about shoes and it would appear. Reminding me that the AP had called the election for Joe Biden? Or how twitter pops up a giant banner on certain tweets asking if I want to read their version of the facts. Supposedly Facebook took efforts to steer people towards more mainstream media outlets after the election and suppress the more independent ones in an effort to have a "calmer less divisive Facebook"

 

I understand the intent is to try to stop misinformation but there seems to be some self appointments as to who is the arbiter of the truth. Glenn does a good job of pointing out the irony in a publication like the NY times, or facebook or twitter claiming to be such.

 

https://greenwald.su...valley-suppress

 

 

A part of the article

 

Then there is the question of who does and does not spread “misinformation.” It is rather astonishing that the news outlets that did more than anyone to convince Americans to believe the most destructive misinformation of this generation: that Saddam had WMDs and was in an alliance with Al Qaeda — The New York Times, The Atlantic, NBC and The New Yorker — have the audacity to prance around as the bulwarks against misinformation rather than what they are: the primary purveyors of it.

Over the last four years, they devoted themselves to the ultimate deranged, mangled conspiracy theory: that the Kremlin had infiltrated the U.S. and was clandestinely controlling the levers of American power through some combination of sexual and financial blackmail. The endless pursuit of that twisted conspiracy led them to produce one article after the next that spread utter falsehoods, embraced reckless journalism and fostered humiliating debacles. The only thing more absurd than these hyper-partisan, reckless outlets posturing as the alternatives to hyper-partisanship is them insisting that they’re the only safeguards against misinformation.

Note how insidiously creepy is The New York Times’ description of a censored, regulated internet. They call it “a vision of what a calmer, less divisive Facebook might look like,” and claim an unnamed Facebook employee described it as “a nicer news feed.”

Yes, discourse that is centralized and regulated, where no dissent is tolerated, where alternative voices are silenced, is always “calmer” and “less divisive.” That’s always the core goal of censorsing speech and ideas: to eliminate “divisiveness” and to pacify the population (“calmer” and “nicer”). That is always the result when orthodoxies imposed downward from the most powerful institutions of authority can no longer be meaningfully challenged.


Edited by FLASHINGROOSTER, 26 November 2020 - 09:01 PM.


#19 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 2,887 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 15 January 2021 - 10:55 AM

For many people that lean right the actions taken by big teck after the capitol riots produced more fear inducing thoughts of the future than the riots themselves. That being the way the populace has applauded the big teck cencorship. Learning that bezo's literally owns half the internet and has the power to silence and destroy companies with a stroke of a keyboard was not something I was aware of. The irony in twitter claiming Uganda is engaging in political censorship that is dangerous is quite fitting for the current state of affairs

 

 

“We strongly condemn internet shutdowns – they are hugely harmful, violate basic human rights and the principles of the #OpenInternet,” the statement continued. Ahead of the Ugandan election, we're hearing reports that Internet service providers are being ordered to block social media and messaging apps.

We strongly condemn internet shutdowns – they are hugely harmful, violate basic human rights and the principles of the #OpenInternet.

Glenn Greenwald

 

How Silicon Valley, in a Show of Monopolistic Force, Destroyed Parler   In the last three months, tech giants have censored political speech and journalism to manipulate U.S. politics, while liberals, with virtual unanimity, have cheered.

 

Critics of Silicon Valley censorship for years heard the same refrain: tech platforms like Facebook, Google and Twitter are private corporations and can host or ban whoever they want. If you don’t like what they are doing, the solution is not to complain or to regulate them. Instead, go create your own social media platform that operates the way you think it should.

The founders of Parler heard that suggestion and tried. In August, 2018, they created a social media platform similar to Twitter but which promised far greater privacy protections, including a refusal to aggregate user data in order to monetize them to advertisers or algorithmically evaluate their interests in order to promote content or products to them. They also promised far greater free speech rights, rejecting the increasingly repressive content policing of Silicon Valley giants.

 

Over the last year, Parler encountered immense success. Millions of people who objected to increasing repression of speech on the largest platforms or who had themselves been banned signed up for the new social media company.

As Silicon Valley censorship radically escalated over the past several months — banning pre-election reporting by The New York Post about the Biden family, denouncing and deleting multiple posts from the U.S. President and then terminating his access altogether, mass-removal of right-wing accounts — so many people migrated to Parler that it was catapulted to the number one spot on the list of most-downloaded apps on the Apple Play Store, the sole and exclusive means which iPhone users have to download apps. “Overall, the app was the 10th most downloaded social media app in 2020 with 8.1 million new installs,” reported TechCrunch.

It looked as if Parler had proven critics of Silicon Valley monopolistic power wrong. Their success showed that it was possible after all to create a new social media platform to compete with Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. And they did so by doing exactly what Silicon Valley defenders long insisted should be done: if you don’t like the rules imposed by tech giants, go create your own platform with different rules.

But today, if you want to download, sign up for, or use Parler, you will be unable to do so. That is because three Silicon Valley monopolies — Amazon, Google and Apple — abruptly united to remove Parler from the internet, exactly at the moment when it became the most-downloaded app in the country.

 

If one were looking for evidence to demonstrate that these tech behemoths are, in fact, monopolies that engage in anti-competitive behavior in violation of antitrust laws, and will obliterate any attempt to compete with them in the marketplace, it would be difficult to imagine anything more compelling than how they just used their unconstrained power to utterly destroy a rising competitor.

The united Silicon Valley attack began on January 8, when Apple emailed Parler and gave them 24 hours to prove they had changed their moderation practices or else face removal from their App Store. The letter claimed: “We have received numerous complaints regarding objectionable content in your Parler service, accusations that the Parler app was used to plan, coordinate, and facilitate the illegal activities in Washington D.C. on January 6, 2021 that led (among other things) to loss of life, numerous injuries, and the destruction of property.” It ended with this warning:

 

To ensure there is no interruption of the availability of your app on the App Store, please submit an update and the requested moderation improvement plan within 24 hours of the date of this message. If we do not receive an update compliant with the App Store Review Guidelines and the requested moderation improvement plan in writing within 24 hours, your app will be removed from the App Store.

 

The 24-hour letter was an obvious pretext and purely performative. Removal was a fait accompli no matter what Parler did. To begin with, the letter was immediately leaked to Buzzfeed, which published it in full. A Parler executive detailed the company’s unsuccessful attempts to communicate with Apple. “They basically ghosted us,” he told me. The next day, Apple notified Parler of its removal from App Store. “We won’t distribute apps that present dangerous and harmful content,” said the world’s richest company, and thus: “We have now rejected your app for the App Store.”

 

It is hard to overstate the harm to a platform from being removed from the App Store. Users of iPhones are barred from downloading apps onto their devices from the internet. If an app is not on the App Store, it cannot be used on the iPhone. Even iPhone users who have already downloaded Parler will lose the ability to receive updates, which will shortly render the platform both unmanageable and unsafe.

In October, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law issued a 425-page report concluding that Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google all possess monopoly power and are using that power anti-competitively. For Apple, they emphasized the company’s control over iPhones through its control of access to the App Store. As Ars Technica put it when highlighting the report’s key findings:

 

Apple controls about 45 percent of the US smartphone market and 20 percent of the global smartphone market, the committee found, and is projected to sell its 2 billionth iPhone in 2021. It is correct that, in the smartphone handset market, Apple is not a monopoly. Instead, iOS and Android hold an effective duopoly in mobile operating systems.

However, the report concludes, Apple does have a monopolistic hold over what you can do with an iPhone. You can only put apps on your phone through the Apple App Store, and Apple has total gatekeeper control over that App Store—that's what Epic is suing the company over. . . .

The committee found internal documents showing that company leadership, including former CEO Steve Jobs, "acknowledged that IAP requirement would stifle competition and limit the apps available to Apple's customers." The report concludes that Apple has also unfairly used its control over APIs, search rankings, and default apps to limit competitors' access to iPhone users.

 

Shortly thereafter, Parler learned that Google, without warning, had also “suspended” it from its Play Store, severely limiting the ability of users to download Parler onto Android phones. Google’s actions also meant that those using Parler on their Android phones would no longer receive necessary functionality and security updates.

 

It was precisely Google’s abuse of its power to control its app device that was at issue “when the European Commission deemed Google LLC as the dominant undertaking in the app stores for the Android mobile operating system (i.e. Google Play Store) and hit the online search and advertisement giant with €4.34 billion for its anti-competitive practices to strengthen its position in various of other markets through its dominance in the app store market.”

The day after a united Apple and Google acted against Parler, Amazon delivered the fatal blow. The company founded and run by the world’s richest man, Jeff Bezos, used virtually identical language as Apple to inform Parler that its web hosting service (AWS) was terminating Parler’s ability to have AWS host its site: “Because Parler cannot comply with our terms of service and poses a very real risk to public safety, we plan to suspend Parler’s account effective Sunday, January 10th, at 11:59PM PST.” Because Amazon is such a dominant force in web hosting, Parler has thus far not found a hosting service for its platform, which is why it has disappeared not only from app stores and phones but also from the internet.

On Thursday, Parler was the most popular app in the United States. By Monday, three of the four Silicon Valley monopolies united to destroy it.

With virtual unanimity, leading U.S. liberals celebrated this use of Silicon Valley monopoly power to shut down Parler, just as they overwhelmingly cheered the prior two extraordinary assertions of tech power to control U.S. political discourse: censorship of The New York Post’s reporting on the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop, and the banning of the U.S. President from major platforms. Indeed, one would be hard-pressed to find a single national liberal-left politician even expressing concerns about any of this, let alone opposing it.

 

Not only did leading left-wing politicians not object but some of them were the ones who pleaded with Silicon Valley to use their power this way. After the internet-policing site Sleeping Giants flagged several Parler posts that called for violence, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez asked: “What are @Apple and @GooglePlay doing about this?” Once Apple responded by removing Parler from its App Store — a move that House Democrats just three months earlier warned was dangerous anti-trust behavior — she praised Apple and then demanded to know: “Good to see this development from @Apple. @GooglePlay what are you going to do about apps being used to organize violence on your platform?”

 

The liberal New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg pronounced herself “disturbed by just how awesome [tech giants’] power is” and added that “it’s dangerous to have a handful of callow young tech titans in charge of who has a megaphone and who does not.” She nonetheless praised these “young tech titans” for using their “dangerous” power to ban Trump and destroy Parler. In other words, liberals like Goldberg are concerned only that Silicon Valley censorship powers might one day be used against people like them, but are perfectly happy as long as it is their adversaries being deplatformed and silenced (Facebook and other platforms have for years banned marginalized people like Palestinians at Israel’s behest, but that is of no concern to U.S. liberals).

 

That is because the dominant strain of American liberalism is not economic socialism but political authoritarianism. Liberals now want to use the force of corporate power to silence those with different ideologies. They are eager for tech monopolies not just to ban accounts they dislike but to remove entire platforms from the internet. They want to imprison people they believe helped their party lose elections, such as Julian Assange, even if it means creating precedents to criminalize journalism.

 

World leaders have vocally condemned the power Silicon Valley has amassed to police political discourse, and were particularly indignant over the banning of the U.S. President. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, various French ministers, and especially Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador all denounced the banning of Trump and other acts of censorship by tech monopolies on the ground that they were anointing themselves “a world media power.” The warnings from López Obrador were particularly eloquent:

 

Even the ACLU — which has rapidly transformed from a civil liberties organization into a liberal activist group since Trump’s election — found the assertion of Silicon Valley’s power to destroy Parler deeply alarming. One of that organization’s most stalwart defenders of civil liberties, lawyer Ben Wizner, told The New York Times that the destruction of Parler was more “troubling” than the deletion of posts or whole accounts: “I think we should recognize the importance of neutrality when we’re talking about the infrastructure of the internet.”

 

Yet American liberals swoon for this authoritarianism. And they are now calling for the use of the most repressive War on Terror measures against their domestic opponents. On Tuesday, House Homeland Security Chair Bennie Thompson (D-MS) urged that GOP Sens. Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley “be put on the no-fly list,” while The Wall Street Journal reported that “Biden has said he plans to make a priority of passing a law against domestic terrorism, and he has been urged to create a White House post overseeing the fight against ideologically inspired violent extremists and increasing funding to combat them.”

 

So much of this liberal support for the attempted destruction of Parler is based in utter ignorance about that platform, and about basic principles of free speech. I’d be very surprised if more than a tiny fraction of liberals cheering Parler’s removal from the internet have ever used the platform or know anything about it other than the snippets they have been shown by those seeking to justify its destruction and to depict it as some neo-Nazi stronghold.

 

Parler was not founded, nor is it run, by pro-Trump, MAGA supporters. The platform was created

based in libertarian values of privacy, anti-surveillance, anti-data collection, and free speech. Most of the key executives are more associated with the politics of Ron Paul and the CATO Institute than Steve Bannon or the Trump family. One is a Never Trump Republican, while another is the former campaign manager of Ron Paul and Rand Paul. Among the few MAGA-affiliated figures is Dan Bongino, an investor. One of the key original investors was Rebekah Mercer.

 

The platform’s design is intended to foster privacy and free speech, not a particular ideology. They minimize the amount of data they collect on users to prevent advertiser monetization or algorithmic targeting. Unlike Facebook and Twitter, they do not assess a user’s preferences in order to decide what they should see. And they were principally borne out of a reaction to increasingly restrictive rules on the major Silicon Valley platforms regarding what could and could not be said.

 

Of course large numbers of Trump supporters ended up on Parler. That’s not because Parler is a pro-Trump outlet, but because those are among the people who were censored by the tech monopolies or who were angered enough by that censorship to seek refuge elsewhere.

It is true that one can find postings on Parler that explicitly advocate violence or are otherwise grotesque. But that is even more true of Facebook, Google-owned YouTube, and Twitter. And contrary to what many have been led to believe, Parler’s Terms of Service includes a ban on explicit advocacy of violence, and they employ a team of paid, trained moderators who delete such postings. Those deletions do not happen perfectly or instantaneously — which is why one can find postings that violate those rules — but the same is true of every major Silicon Valley platform.

 

Indeed, a Parler executive told me that of the thirteen people arrested as of Monday for the breach at the Capitol, none appear to be active users of Parler. The Capitol breach was planned far more on Facebook and YouTube. As Recode reported, while some protesters participated in both Parler and Gab, many of the calls to attend the Capitol were from YouTube videos, while many of the key planners “have continued to use mainstream platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube.” The article quoted Fadi Quran, campaign director at the human rights group Avaaz, as saying: “In DC, we saw QAnon conspiracists and other militias that would never have grown to this size without being turbo-charged by Facebook and Twitter.” 

And that’s to say nothing of the endless number of hypocrisies with Silicon Valley giants feigning opposition to violent rhetoric or political extremism. Amazon, for instance, is one of the CIA’s most profitable partners, with a $600 million contract to provide services to the agency, and it is constantly bidding for more. On Facebook and Twitter, one finds official accounts from the most repressive and violent regimes on earth, including Saudi Arabia, and pages devoted to propaganda on behalf of the Egyptian regime. Does anyone think these tech giants have a genuine concern about violence and extremism?

  So why did Democratic politicians and journalists focus on Parler rather than Facebook and YouTube? Why did Amazon, Google and Apple make a flamboyant showing of removing Parler from the internet while leaving much larger platforms with far more extremism and advocacy of violence flowing on a daily basis?

In part it is because these Silicon Valley giants — Google, Facebook, Amazon, Apple — donate enormous sums of money to the Democratic Party and their leaders, so of course Democrats will cheer them rather than call for punishment or their removal from the internet. Part of it is because Parler is an upstart, a much easier target to try to destroy than Facebook or Google. And in part it is because the Democrats are about to control the Executive Branch and both houses of Congress, leaving Silicon Valley giants eager to please them by silencing their adversaries. This corrupt motive was made expressly clear by long-time Clinton operative Jennifer Palmieri:

 

The nature of monopolistic power is that anti-competitive entities engage in anti-trust illegalities to destroy rising competitors. Parler is associated with the wrong political ideology. It is a small and new enough platform such that it can be made an example of. Its head can be placed on a pike to make clear that no attempt to compete with existing Silicon Valley monopolies is possible. And its destruction preserves the unchallengeable power of a tiny handful of tech oligarchs over the political discourse not just of the United States but democracies worldwide (which is why Germany, France and Mexico are raising their voices in protest).

No authoritarians believe they are authoritarians. No matter how repressive are the measures they support — censorship, monopoly power, no-fly lists for American citizens without due process — they tell themselves that those they are silencing and attacking are so evil, are terrorists, that anything done against them is noble and benevolent, not despotic and repressive. That is how American liberals currently think, as they fortify the control of Silicon Valley monopolies over our political lives, exemplified by the overnight destruction of a new and popular competitor.


 


 

 

 


  • Auhron likes this




Like Mycotopia? Become a member today!