Jump to content
BeAChooser

ARE TECH GIANTS WORKING TOGETHER TO CENSOR CONSERVATIVES?

Recommended Posts

Spoiler for all sides alert! giant techs don't silence deniers from any angle of misdirecting honest answers. they silence anyone offerring where humanity misleads ancestry historically recording current events at hiding the self evident with defending what people choose to believe possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/08/20/bokhari-election-interference-actually-looks-like/

 

Quote

 

Bokhari: This Is What ‘Election Interference’ Actually Looks Like


Censored_Collage_2.png


The purge of the right on social media was once a slow trickle, with high-profile bans happening only occasionally, and then subsiding. With just three months until the midterm elections, the Masters of the Universe in Silicon Valley have turned online censorship into a cascade.


Earlier this month, Alex Jones was blacklisted on virtually every major social media service, including Apple podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, Facebook, and even Pinterest and Linkedin. Following pressure from CNN and Media Matters, Twitter eventually followed suit with a week-long suspension.


A few days after the mass-purge of Jones’ accounts, Twitter permanently banned libertarian commentator Gavin McInnes, and the official accounts of  his grassroots organization the Proud Boys, on bogus charges of “supporting violence.”


A few days later, Patreon, which has been ramping up its censorship of right-wingers (usually based on unsupported accusations of violence-promotion similar to those used by Twitter), kicked off Islam critic Robert Spencer, founder of Jihad Watch. It later emerged that Mastercard had pressured Patreon into making the call.


Then, last night, Twitter went on another mass-purge of right-wingers, with multiple conservative personalities reporting that their follower count had dropped by hundreds overnight. Among those purged was the account of Vey, a graphics designer who previously produced artwork for Breitbart News. He provided Breitbart with a screenshot of progressive activists targeting his account for mass-reporting prior to his ban.


Big tech CEOs like Twitter’s Jack Dorsey resolutely maintain that they do not discriminate on the basis of political views. In an election year, it would be suicidal to claim otherwise. But the mountain of evidence contradicting them renders their well-rehearsed media talking points almost comical.


The list of the conservatives, right-wingers and other critics of progressivism who have been kicked off at least one major online service is huge. Tommy Robinson (banned by Twitter), Gavin McInnes (banned by Twitter), Lauren Southern (banned by Patreon, Stripe), Britanny Pettibone (banned by Patreon), Proud Boys USA (banned by Twitter), Sargon of Akkad (banned by Twitter), Roger Stone (banned by Twitter), Milo Yiannopolous (banned by Twitter), Hunter Avallone (banned by Twitter), Prager University (censored by YouTube), congressional candidate Elizabeth Heng (campaign ads banned by Facebook and Twitter), Pamela Geller (repeatedly kicked off Facebook), Alex Jones (banned by almost every social media platform).


These individuals all had hundreds of thousands, sometimes millions of followers on their social media accounts prior to being banned. Their social media platforms served as organizing hubs for petitions, fundraisers, rallies, and other political activities of the grassroots right. The loss of their social media accounts will have a major impact on the ability of conservatives and right-wingers to organize its online supporters for the U.S. midterm elections and beyond.


The left, meanwhile, is virtually unrestricted in its ability to amplify its voice on social media. On the same day that it purged hundreds of accounts that followed prominent conservatives on social media, it verified Sarah Jeong, the newly-minted New York Times editorial board member who rose to infamy for using Twitter to engage in racist diatribes against white people.


Jeong described whites as “groveling goblins” who “mark up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants,” and boasted of feeling “joy” when being “cruel to old white men.” Not only did Twitter decline to ban her for hate speech, they didn’t even ask her to delete the offending tweets. And then they verified her — after her tweets became the subject of international attention.


This power imbalance on the most influential technology platforms on the internet is sure to have an impact on the midterm elections. One side of politics is allowed to mobilize online without being impeded, while the other is not.


For over a year, Democrats and the mainstream media have been caterwauling about Russian social media interference in the 2016 election. Yet, as even the Washington Post admitted, Russia spent a minuscule sum on Facebook ads in 2016. Voters observing the ads, according to research conducted by an academic who is no fan of Trump, were unlikely to have been affected. If Russia’s goal was to sow panic in American politics then they’ve succeeded, largely thanks to the Democrats. But direct influence on voters? Not so much.


The real attempt to bias the outcome of an election hasn’t come from beyond America’s borders, but from the San Francisco Bay Area. Shamed by Democrats and the Media for “letting Trump win” in 2016, social media companies have responded by utterly crippling the ability of the president’s supporters to organize on the web.


Free-market libertarians say “build your own platforms” — but replacing even if replacing Google, Twitter, and Facebook were possible (and that’s unlikely), it’s a project that would take many years, possibly over a decade, to complete. How many election cycles could Silicon Valley influence by then?


Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale, who masterminded the president’s digital operations in 2020, understands the problem. In an op-ed for the Washington Examiner last week, Parscale says “big tech is becoming big brother.”


“What we are seeing in Big Tech is the inherent totalitarian impulse of the Left come into full focus,” writes Parscale. “The Left is losing at the ballot box, and there are some signs it is starting to lose the culture war too. The free and open Internet has been indispensable in spreading conservative ideas, and it was indispensable in getting Donald Trump elected president — and now the Left wishes to destroy it.”


If they want to save themselves, the rest of the Republican party must realize that the tech giants that have come to dominate so much of our lives are not the same as Christian bakers, and are crying out for regulation. Now is not the time for free-market platitudes. Democracy itself is at risk.

 

 

If the right have no voice, they might turn to other means of stopping tyranny.  

 

Just saying ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2018/08/21/facebook-has-trust-ratings-for-users-but-it-wont-tell-your-score.html

 

Quote

 

Facebook has trust ratings for users, but it won't tell you your score


Facebook is rating users based on how "trustworthy" it thinks they are.


Users receive a score on a scale from zero to one that determines if they have a good or bad reputation – but it's completely hidden.


The rating system was revealed in a report by the Washington Post, which says it's in place to "help identify malicious actors".

 

 

maxresdefault-2.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Craig234 said:

Censoring 'liars' and censoring 'conservatives' is pretty much the same thing.

 

Mighty brave of you, snowflake, to come over to this thread and add your 2 worthless cents ... when you refuse to debate me on any topic.  

 

'Craig234' and 'COWARD' are pretty much the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://patriotretort.com/this-isnt-about-impeaching-trump-its-about-silencing-us/

 

Quote

 

This isn’t about impeaching Trump, it’s about silencing us


The Left is hoping to impeach the President of the United States. But impeaching 


Trump is just a means to an end, not the end itself.


The goal here is to silence us.


In fact, it is just one more in a long line of attempts to keep us uppity Americans from having a say in our self-government.


I absolutely believe that impeaching Trump is about us – our punishment for not bowing to our social betters.


The only crime President Trump has committed is putting the American people first.


And for the establishment – the Swamp if you will — that simply cannot stand.


So they seek to destroy him as a way to silence and punish us.


Impeaching Trump is the tool, not the goal.


Their hope is to so dispirit us that we throw up our hands and give up.


They want us at the point where we stalk off defeated thinking, “Why should we even try anymore?”


This isn’t new.


They’ve been doing this ever since Donald Trump announced his candidacy.


In fact, they’ve been doing this for years before Donald Trump even decided to run.


This is, as Angelo Codevilla famously put it in 2010, the Ruling Class versus the Country Class.


And billionaire Donald Trump became the unlikely champion of the Country Class – the regular folks whom Washington has scoffed at and ignored for decades.


Or as Ann Coulter put it in the summary of her book In Trump We Trust: E Pluribus Awesome!:

 

Quote

Donald Trump isn’t a politician — he’s a one-man wrecking ball against our dysfunctional and corrupt establishment. We’re about to see the deluxe version of the left’s favorite theme: Vote for us or we’ll call you stupid. It’s the working class against the smirking class.


Nobody in his right mind would think this “smirking class” would just lie down and let the American people take away its power.


They will fight with everything they have to keep their grip on our self-government.


Even if that means fighting dirty.


Last year, President Trump held a rally in West Virginia. And, among other hateful things said about it, was this tweet:

 

 

In a column titled There’s a reason for the sneering condescension of the Smirking Class, I wrote:

 

Quote

 

Do you know why the Left and the Media despise Donald J. Trump?


It isn’t because they think he’s a fascist. And it has nothing to do with Russia.


No. They despise Donald Trump because he reinvigorated a segment of the country who had given up on voting.


More importantly, he reinvigorated a segment of the country the Smirking Class didn’t want voting.


In late 2011 Rush Limbaugh pointed out a story in the New York Times by Thomas Edsall in which Edsall wrote that the Obama campaign made the conscious decision to write off white working class voters.


For Obama, this strategy worked because the Republicans nominated a squishy, cosmopolitan RINO to run against him.


So white working class voters did as they were expected. They stayed home.


In June 2015, the New York Times reported that Hillary would use the same strategy Obama did.


Screw the white working class. She was going after the Obama coalition of minorities and women.


And had things gone according to plan, she would have won.


If the GOP had nominated Jeb Bush as the Smirking Class had planned, the white working class would have stayed home again.


But that didn’t happen.


Instead, Donald Trump won the nomination.


And the tens of millions of working class voters who had given up came roaring back again.


Instead of being demoralized, they were energized.


And let’s be honest. The Democrats can’t win when working class voters are energized.


And that’s why the Smirking Class hates Donald Trump.

 


Nothing has changed.


They still want to shut us up.


But in 2016, they failed at keeping us from electing President Trump.


They failed at every subsequent smear campaign.


And their attempted backroom coup – or insurance policy — is falling apart.


So what’s left?


Well, impeaching Trump.


So they’re going to make 2018 all about impeaching Trump.


And in the intervening weeks, they hope to dispirit us, discourage us and silence us.


But I’m going to say the same exact thing now that I said before the 2016 election: Vote:

 

Quote

 

The only poll that matters is the election itself. This is the only one that will include not “possible voters,” not “likely voters,” but people who actually went out and cast their votes.


And in that poll, there are more of us.


The Enslaved Press may want to deny it, my friends, but there are more of us. And the best way to prove that to them is to vote.


Vote.


No matter what.


At the end of all of this, the truth is, you and I have more power over the outcome of this election than any poll or any “It’s Over” news report from the Enslaved Press.


We are the last surprise.

 


Vote — not just to stop them from impeaching Trump.


No.


Vote to stop them from silencing, subjugating and disenfranchising us.


The Smirking Class needs a win in November to keep us from reclaiming our own self-government.


We’re the ones who are standing in their way.


And come November, we have to be the ones to stop them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tuna Salad
  1. 5-ounce cans water-packed tuna fish.
  2. 2 to 4 tablespoons. mayonnaise.
  3. rib celery, diced small.
  4. small shallot or 1/4 red onion, diced small.
  5. 1 tablespoon. lemon juice (from 1/2 lemon)
  6. 1 tablespoon. pickle relish, optional.
  7. Salt and pepper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2018 at 9:13 AM, sole result said:

Spoiler for all sides alert! giant techs don't silence deniers from any angle of misdirecting honest answers. they silence anyone offerring where humanity misleads ancestry historically recording current events at hiding the self evident with defending what people choose to believe possible.

Needs repeated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These tech companies are demonstrably doing more than just censoring conservative ...

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/09/tucker_carlson_busts_open_google_conspiracy_to_swing_election_to_hillary.html

 

Quote

 

Tucker Carlson busts open Google conspiracy to swing election to Hillary


Last night, Tucker Carlson broke an explosive story featuring internal Google documents indicating that the company made a "silent donation" – its own term – to the Hillary Clinton campaign by using its information channeling might to mobilize voters it thought would cast ballots for the Democrats' candidate.  The move was unsuccessful, but it illustrates the enormous power to shape elections by bringing some information to the voting public while suppressing other information.


As Carlson points out, if Russian purchases of a hundred thousand bucks' worth of Facebook ads is supposed to be worrisome, the power of Google, which is the information funnel for about 90% of the public, is catastrophe once the giant decides to use its power to control elections.

 

Both Carlson's initial presentation of the information and his later discussion of its implications with Mark Steyn are embedded below.  Breitbart received the  texts of the emails in question and features them for your review.

 

In essence, Eliana Murillo, Google's Multicultural Marketing department head, wrote a series of emails to Google executives, at first carefully maintaining the guise of political neutrality while discussing her (and Google's) efforts to heighten Latino turnout.

 

But following the shock of Trump's victory, Murillo let the mask slip and revealed the partisan intent, using the words "silent donation" to describe her efforts.  This ought to trigger a Federal Election Commission investigation and ought to be grist for legislators contemplating antitrust measures against this near monopoly in information.


Tucker Carlson did not reveal how these emails came into his hands, but I have a strong suspicion that they are the result of the discovery process in the lawsuit filed by James Damore, the software engineer who was fired by Google after writing a polite internal email questioning some aspects of the diversity initiatives there.  He is represented by attorney Harmeet Dhillon, who has been a guest on Carlson's show a number of times.


I raise this point not to criticize anyone – not Carlson, not Drudge, and not Dhillon – but rather in expectation that even more information will be coming our way.  The discovery process in civil litigation may be even more effective than a criminal probe would be in excavating secrets from the (formerly "don't be) evil" empire.


Watch and be informed about the Lords of Information.  Tucker presents the case:


…snip the videos of Tucker’s broadcast …


Rush transcripts via Grabien:


>> Tucker: Good evening, welcome to tucker Carlson tonight. Ken Starr joins us with more investigation on the Clinton investigation that made him famous. He considered perjury charges against Hillary Clinton we now now. We’ll tell us about that. First an exclusive investigation from the show. For two years the alleged threat that Russia poses to our elections has been official Washington obsession. The usual business of government has come to a halt as Democrats and their allies in the press fret that Russian agents may be interfering with our democracy. The root of these fears, a handful of Russian ads on Facebook that almost nobody saw, in a small number of efforts to hack Democratic Party e-mail accounts. Now, let’s assume that all of these deeply worried people are sincere, that they really care about the integrity of our democracy. Then why has almost nobody said anything about T monopolies that dominate the exchange of information in this country? If a few dozen Facebook ads are enough to subvert an election shouldn’t we be worried about Facebook itself which controls literally bill Lons of ads? A couple of times on this show social scientist Robert Epstein has pointed out that Google alone could determine the outcome of almost any American election just by altering its search supgts. We’d never know what happened. Oh, say tech defenders don’t worry, these are businesses, they exist to make money not push plirt Cal agendas. Turns out that’s not true and woe can prove it. An e-mail obtained exclusively by this show revealed that a senior Google employee deployed the company resources to increase voter turnout in ways she believed would help the Clinton campaign win in the last election. The e-mail came from a woman named eliono Mario, the head of the multi cultural marketing department. She sent it one day after the president election. That e-mail was subsequently forwarded by two Google vice presidents to more staff members throughout the company. In her e-mail, she touts Google’s multi facetted efforts to boost Hispanic turnout. Latinos voted in record-breaking numbers especially in Florida, Nevada, and Arizona of the last of which she describes as, quote, a key state for us. She brags that the company used its power to ensure that millions of people saw certain hash tags and social media impressions with the goal of influencing their behavior during the election. Elsewhere in the e-mail, she says Google, quote, supported partners like Voto Latino to pay for rides to the polls in key states. She describes this assistant as the silent donation. She then says Google helped Voto Latino ad campaigns to promote the rides. Officially it is a nonpartisan entity but that’s a sham. It is vocally partisan. Recently the group declared that hispanics all hispanics are in President Trump’s, quote, crosshairs. They said they plan to respond by registering another million Hispanic voters in the next presidential cycle. Voto Latino has clear political goals, goals that Google supported in 2016. We ask both Google and Voto Latino for clarification, what did she mean by a silent donation. This is a potentially significant legal question. Neither company responded to us. At the end of her e-mail she makes it clear that Google was working to get Hillary Clinton elected. This wasn’t a get out the vote effort, whatever they say, it was not aimed at all potential voters. It wasn’t even aimed at a balanced cross section of sub groups. Google didn’t try to get out the vote among Christian Arabs in Michigan or persian Jews in Los Angeles, they sometimes vote Republican. It was aimed only at one group, a group that Google cynically assumed would vote exclusively for the Democratic Party. Furthermore this mobilization effort targeted not the entire country but swing states vital to the Hillary campaign. It was not an exercise that civics, it was political consulting, an in-kind contribution to the Hillary Clinton for president campaign. In the end Google was disappointed as Mario conceded, quote, ultimately after all was said and done the Latino community came of the to vote and completely surprised us. We never anticipated that 29% of Latinos would vote for trump. No one did F you see a lane Tino googler in the office give them a smile, they’re probably hurting right now. You can rest assured that the will tinos of these blue states need your thoughts and prayers for them and their families. I had planned a vacation and thought I would be taking the time to celebrate. Now it will be time to reflect on how to continue to support my community through these difficult times, end quote. Nobody at the DNC was more upset by the results than Mario. Google tried to get Hillary elected, they failed this time. We reached out to Google, the company did not deny the e-mail was real or showed a clear political preference. Their only defense was the activities it described were nonpartisan or weren’t taken officially by the company. But of course they were both. Plenty of people in Google knew what was going on and we’ve seen no evidence that anyone at Google disapproved of it or tried to reign it in.
— Rein it in. Google is more powerful two years later and the left has increasingly become radical in what it’s willing to do to regime political power. What could Google be doing this election cycle to support its candidates? What can they do in 2020? A question almost nobody with a seems interested in even asking. They ought to be interested.


Steyn segment:


Mark steyn is an author and columnist, he joins us of the outlines are clear, Google is the most powerful company in the world, they have a choke hold on human information, they can clearly guide the outcome of the election if they chose to do so. They tried to influence the last election. Why shouldn’t we be deeply concerned about this?
>> We should be deeply concerned. As you said, Russia, everyone goes bananas about they bought 100 grand worth of Facebook ads. Google is already more powerful in terms of its control over people’s lives than almost every government on the planet. I would say arguably, it has more control over American lives than, say, the government of Russia does as a practical matter. People are very naive about Google searchs, they think it doesn’t — whether you’re in a hotel in Des Moines or whether you’re hanging upside down in your bondage Dunn Jan? Poughkeepsie, when you enter the search results everything is the same. As this lady Mario has explained, they’re capable of targeting election content, specifically to certain voting groups. So this isn’t like, you know, rock the vote or public attempts to get out the vote. This is where the world’s most powerful company is using data mining to channel election, be partisan election information to key voting DEM graph yibs.
— Demographics. They would steal the election and you’d never know it.
>> Tucker: Well, what is interesting to me is the left has been very agitated for the past six or seven years about citizens united and the influence of money on politics. I don’t think all of their concerns are stupid by the way. But this is the example, the most powerful influenceer of elections potentially the world has ever known. I don’t think I’ve heard a single liberal say anything about Google’s effect on elections, subverting our democracy, why is that?
>> I think for the obvious reason that they’re doing it for, as Mario would say, for our side, for our team, for the left’s team, for liberalism’s team. And that’s very different N a sense there’s something quaintly old fashioned about the citizens. Jeb Bush blew $100 million to get to 2.4% in Iowa, the old-fashioned way, sticking up billboards, making Robo calls. What if you had a monopoly on people’s access to information, and without them even knowing about it, just when they happen to open up their phone or their laptop in the morning, you were able to direct them to your candidate without anybody knowing it. That is far m05ore important, that’s far more scary. The implications are absolutely terrible. And this memo is absolutely terrible in what it reveals about Google. The silent low donation bit is very interesting. As you said, has legal implications. Whatever legal implications they are, they’re a lot more solid than whether some guy paid off some porn star just to take a random example.
>> Tucker: I hope our elected officials pay attention to this. Mark, we’ll see you later in the show, thank you very much.
>> Thank, tucker.

 


This is damning.

 

Perhaps it is time to break up Google and the rest of these companies?


Just saying …

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, untitled said:

Every intelligent person hates Trump.

 

^^^^^ claims he has me on ignore but look how quickly he posted on this thread after I added a damning article after 2 weeks of nothing being posted.

 

And to make matters worse, he clearly didn't have time to read what I posted before posting.

 

So not only is untitled a liar but one that posts from complete ignorance.

 

Ask yourself, folks, why would he be so desperate to distract from the post I just made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's just conservative news is not as popular and most of the rag you all read is not even recognized by Republicans with any brains

 

Brietfart is laughable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bluenami said:

ARE TECH GIANTS WORKING TOGETHER TO CENSOR CONSERVATIVES?

They are censoring idiots, who just happen to be disproportionately conservative.

 

 

They know right wingers are doofuses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see...  No credible scientist on the planet gives any credence to the climate deniers...and yet they keep showing up as "pundits" on fvcking news shows, pushing that horsesh!t crazy lie as if it's some sort of debate.  The "librul media" is a myth used by Rush Limbaugh and his pimps to brush aside any news that makes them look bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, splunch said:

Let's see...  No credible scientist on the planet gives any credence to the climate deniers...and yet they keep showing up as "pundits" on fvcking news shows, pushing that horsesh!t crazy lie as if it's some sort of debate.  The "librul media" is a myth used by Rush Limbaugh and his pimps to brush aside any news that makes them look bad.

 

Did you ever listen to Alex Jones? The guy is a meth addict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, untitled said:

 

Did you ever listen to Alex Jones? The guy is a meth addict.

I've heard he's a bit of a drunk, actually.  Which is just as bad, really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, splunch said:

I've heard he's a bit of a drunk, actually.  Which is just as bad, really.

 

On speed and drunk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, untitled said:

 

Did you ever listen to Alex Jones? The guy is a meth addict.

 

I listened a lot after the Vegas shooting.  Doom porn can be fun.  But Alex is too much to handle for regular entertainment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bluenami said:

 

I listened a lot after the Vegas shooting.  Doom porn can be fun.  But Alex is too much to handle for regular entertainment.

 

The guy is stupid. He just says a lot of words with nothing coherent ever being expressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BeAChooser said:

These tech companies are demonstrably doing more than just censoring conservative ...

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/09/tucker_carlson_busts_open_google_conspiracy_to_swing_election_to_hillary.html

 


This is damning.

 

Perhaps it is time to break up Google and the rest of these companies?


Just saying …

 

I argued this years ago, but conservatives wouldn't have it.  Then I started this thread https://www.liberalforum.org/topic/237501-cows-defending-slaughterhouse/  which went nowhere.

 

Screw it... let them censor... I'm tired of fighting conservatives to protect conservatives.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, untitled said:

 

The guy is stupid. He just says a lot of words with nothing coherent ever being expressed.

 

It's never about the message and always about the messenger.  Demonization of the messenger is easier (and more fun) than defeating the message.  Rush, Savage, Jones, Hannity... they all operate that way because it's what their base likes.  Who you are is more important than what you say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...