YOUTUBE TO LABEL CRITICISM OF IMMIGRATION “HATE SPEECH”

Report: Youtube to Label Criticism of Immigration “Hate Speech”

New policy Big Tech’s latest push against conservative voices

“Immigration status” has been declared a protected category on YouTube’s hate speech policy, effectively banning speech critical of illegal immigration, experts warn.

Even though the policy specifies YouTube will only remove content that promotes violence or hatred towards “individuals or groups” based on that attribute, conservatives are concerned the policy will be used to justify the removal of accurate criticism of immigration policies.

“YouTube’s new policy on hate speech includes immigration status,” said Swedish independent journalist Peter Imanuelsen. “In other words, you cannot criticize immigration anymore.”

“This is YouTube taking a left-wing political stance. Censorship of conservative opinions is getting worse on social media.”

CAP

Given Big Tech’s track record of left-leaning bias, simple criticism towards immigration being viewed as “hate” is likely.

Case in point, YouTube recently demonetized popular comedian/conservative YouTuber Steven Crowder after he was accused of targeted harassment for his gay jokes directed at a Vox editor.

Remember, last year, Alex Jones predicted that Steven Crowder was the next target of Big Tech’s biased censorship campaign.

Steven Crowder Is The Next Target Of Corporate Censorship

Moreover, the policy has effectively created a new “protected class” free of criticism, adds constitutional lawyer Robert Barnes.

CAP

 

Old wine, new bottles: Twitter’s ‘simplified’ rules are just as vague and arbitrary

Screen Shot 2019-06-07 at 11.21.13 AM

Twitter has revamped its rules, cutting them into tweet-sized morsels in the name of a “healthier public conversation.” Just as opaque and patronizing as before, they’re now even more likely to get you banned. Move over, YouTube!

Twitter has presented its users with a reformulated “easier to understand” set of rules, moving most of the text off the main page for a pleasing aesthetic experience and upping the chance users will never read the detailed policies. The byzantine and often self-contradictory conduct code is chock full of pitfalls, and users are quickly finding out the range of bannable offenses has swollen to rival YouTube’s and Facebook’s.

“Private Information,” “Sensitive Media” and “Terrorism & Violent Extremism” are the subsections advertised on the new rules page as having received a makeover, but reading through them is likely to leave the user even more confused than before. “We also prohibit the glorification of violence,” the tweet-sized takeaway under “violence and extremism” reads, but if you click through to the actual policy page, it turns out “violent acts by state actors” get a pass.

Non-state actors – including Vox blogger Carlos Maza, whose complaints have been blamed for triggering Wednesday’s mass deplatforming on YouTube – have also gotten away with what could fall under “glorification of violence,” as some were quick to point out, noting their accounts had not only survived but thrived during the latest “purge.”

Screen Shot 2019-06-07 at 11.28.31 AM

Another user raised the question of why Twitter would ask for government-issued identification in the course of a suspension appeal, and where that information might end up – considering how fellow tech giant Google hands over the personal data of tens of thousands of users yearly at the government’s request.

Screen Shot 2019-06-07 at 11.29.40 AM

Twitter’s notoriously-vague hate speech rules have not been clarified – if anything, they’ve grown even more complex. There’s a “hateful conduct” policy and an “abuse/harassment” policy, the latter of which includes “hoping that someone experiences physical harm,” handing even more ammunition to the opponents of ‘thought police’.

Still want to get somebody banned but can’t find a rationale under the new and improved hate speech/harassment rules? Twitter has thoughtfully included a catch-all, menacingly vague prohibition against “platform manipulation” that echoes the “coordinated inauthentic behavior” reason Facebook gave for deplatforming hundreds of politically-active accounts before the 2018 US midterm elections.

“You may not use Twitter’s services in a manner intended to artificially amplify or suppress information or engage in behavior that manipulates or disrupts people’s experience on Twitter.”

Screen Shot 2019-06-07 at 11.31.51 AM

The page warns users against tweeting too much, following too many people, “aggressively adding users to lists,” trying to make accounts “appear more popular or active than they are,” and tweeting with “excessive, unrelated hashtags” – among dozens more no-nos. But “hobby/artistic bots” are apparently OK – a ready-made loophole for the likes of New Knowledge, the American Democrat-linked “experts” who ran an army of fake “Russian bots.”

The new rules don’t explain the “unusual behavior” that has apparently become grounds for banning, and many users took the opportunity to lash out at the platform for its censorship.

Screen Shot 2019-06-07 at 11.34.06 AM

Parody accounts are supposedly still allowed, though someone apparently forgot to tell whoever deplatformed the latest AOC parody account on Tuesday.

Screen Shot 2019-06-07 at 11.35.16 AM

The new, improved Twitter rules dropped less than 24 hours after the #VoxAdpocalypse left hundreds of YouTubers demonetized or even deleted for so-called “supremacist content” – a vague term which in practice seems to have translated to “conservative political speech,” since most white supremacist content had already been removed from the platform in earlier purges and “supremacist” content of any other kind appears to have been largely left alone.

‘This will not go well’: YouTube cracks down on pundits & journalists after policy change

Screen Shot 2019-06-07 at 11.37.30 AM

‘THE SECOND ADPOCALYPSE IS HERE’: YOUTUBE DEMONETIZES STEVEN CROWDER AFTER GAY VOX EDITOR COMPLAINS

‘The Second Adpocalypse Is Here’: YouTube Demonetizes Steven Crowder After Gay Vox Editor Complains

Move comes as YouTube announces ban on ‘hateful,’ ‘supremacist’ videos

By Adan Salazar

YouTube announced it has demonetized the channel of conservative commentator Steven Crowder, days after a Vox editor accused the comedian of harassment.

The company made the announcement in response to a Twitter thread created by Vox editor Carlos Maza, which accused Crowder of targeted harassment and causing him mental anguish.

“Update on our continued review–we have suspended this channel’s monetization,” @TeamYouTube wrote Wednesday in response to Maza’s thread. “We came to this decision because a pattern of egregious actions has harmed the broader community and is against our YouTube Partner Program policies.”

CAP

Hours earlier, YouTube had claimed it would take no action against Crowder’s channel.

While they barred the former Fox News contributor from making money off his channel, YouTube did not move to ban the channel outright.

Crowder pointed to videos of Steven Colbert, Samantha Bee and others making fun of President Trump as an example of YouTube’s double standard.

But Maza didn’t stop there.

After YouTube announced it would demonetize Crowder, Maza again complained arguing that most of Crowder’s revenue came from t-shirt sales not YouTube monetization: “So the fuck what. Basically all political content gets “demonetized.”

To which YouTube ordered Crowder would “need to remove the link to his T-shirts” in order to have his monetization re-instated.

CAP

In tweets Wednesday, Crowder said he’d spoken with YouTube and had indeed confirmed a massive culling of independent YouTube creators was about to take place.

CAP

“Just spoke with YouTube. Confirmed, the second Adpocalypse IS here and they’re coming for you,” Crowder wrote. “More details to follow. Stay tuned.”

“The next adpocalypse is coming,” Crowder said in a follow-up video. “It’s coming for a lot of you. It’s coming hard. It’s gonna be happening fast and strong and it’s probably gonna be happening to a lot more of you than you realize.”

On Wednesday, YouTube announced a change to its community guidelines affecting channels on the platform which they say “incite hatred, harassment, discrimination and violence.”

YouTube to ban ‘hateful’ videos with ‘supremacist’ content

CAP

YouTube has updated its hate speech policies and will now ban videos “with supremacist content,” as well clips promoting certain conspiracy theories.

The company, a subsidiary of Google, announced the clampdown on “hateful content” in a blog post on Wednesday. The company had already restricted commenting and sharing features on similar videos in 2017, but the new ban goes one step further.

“Today, we’re taking another step in our hate speech policy by specifically prohibiting videos alleging that a group is superior in order to justify discrimination, segregation or exclusion,” read the blog post.

YouTube says NO to gay journalist’s request to silence conservative blogger’s ‘homophobic abuse’

CAP

YouTube’s insistence that it will ban all forms of “supremacist” videos stands in contrast to a similar policy change at Facebook, which decided to exclusively ban “white nationalist” and “white supremacist” content, seemingly ignoring similar content from, for example, Black separatist or radical Zionism movements.

Nevertheless, YouTube presented “videos that promote or glorify Nazi ideology” as an example that would break its new rules.

In addition to these changes, YouTube said it will reduce the spread of content that does not outright violate its policies, but “comes right up to the line.”

The company said that this “borderline” content, including flat-earth conspiracy videos and phony science videos, will be dropped from viewers’ recommendations and replaced with videos “from authoritative sources,” a move that will surely rankle free-speech advocates and those who already accuse the site of bias.

‘Death by algorithm’: Maddow inconsolable after YouTube recommends RT interview on Mueller report

CAP

“Finally, we will remove content denying that well-documented violent events, like the Holocaust or the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, took place,” the post continued. YouTube was one of several tech giants that booted Infowars’ Alex Jones from their sites last August, much to the dismay of conservatives and free-speech activists.

Jones had previously suggested that the schoolchildren shot dead in the 2012 Sandy Hook tragedy were “crisis actors”hired to further the gun-control agenda.

Within minutes of the new rules being announced, conservative commentators, journalists, and even black metal musicians reported their videos banned or demonetized by YouTube.

Daily Beast reporter reveals ‘shocking’ truth that disinformation ‘isn’t purview of Russia alone’

CAP

A Daily Beast reporter has dashed the illusions of Western journalists everywhere by revealing on Twitter the shocking and grim reality that disinformation and fake news are not exclusively Russian concepts.

Reporter Sam Stein tweeted about the reaction to a Daily Beast effort to dox and harass a private citizen for the crime of posting a doctored video of US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, when he decided to philosophize on the nature of propaganda, concluding that “disinformation isn’t the purview of Russia alone.”

Who could ever have guessed?

CAP

Stein was “shocked” by the fact that readers weren’t totally delighted by his colleague Kevin Poulsen’s fearless report exposing the political misdeeds of a day laborer and sports blogger from the Bronx, who dared to make fun of Pelosi — and who actually denies posting the viral video at all.

CAP

On Twitter, reaction to Stein’s tweet was split between those wondering why he thought attempting to ruin the man’s life was a solid editorial decision — and those stunned that Stein had, until now, apparently believed disinformation was something uniquely Russian.

The only people who ever believed disinformation was “the purview of Russia alone” are “self-aggrandizing, sleazy, click-chasing Daily Beast journalists,” tweeted journalist Michael Tracey.

CAP

“Thank you for showing us that moronic Russophobia is very much the purview of Daily Beast journalists,” wrote reporter Aaron Mate.

Many felt a tad uncomfortable with the idea of major media outlets using their resources to attack and harass citizens for posting political content that they don’t agree with on social media.

CAP

This is far from the first of the Daily Beast’s rather flimsily-founded hit pieces. Last month, the website ran an article claiming Democratic presidential hopeful Tulsi Gabbard was being “boosted” by Russia after digging up three donations she had received from so-called “Putin apologists.”

Twitter suspends anti-Trump stars the Krassenstein brothers for fake accounts

CAP

The Bronx man continues to maintain his innocence regarding the Pelosi video, even launching a GoFundMe page to open a legal case against the website. Meanwhile, Stein is presumably furiously researching the history of propaganda and having his mind blown by the results.

NETFLIX PROMOTES PEDOPHILIA WITH DRAG QUEEN INDOCTRINATION SERIES

Netflix Promotes Pedophilia With Drag Queen Indoctrination Series

‘Dancing Queen’ featuring pre-pubescent boys in drag renewed for Season 2

By Jan Bowne

As competitors to Netflix continue to appear over the horizon, Netflix made its market position clear in a company-wide letter.

As CNBC reported, “It’s newer forms of entertainment — such as Fortnite and Google’s YouTube — that got shout-outs in the company’s letter as stronger competitors.”

But if there is a shred of morality and providence left in America, Netflix may not even be able to see the true threat to their success is themselves.

Netflix has already been scrutinized for allowing child pornography on their service.

The Argentinian film “Desire” depicted two ten-year-old girls in a sexual situation.

Also, there is the extremely perverse Netflix animated series Big Mouth.

As the Freedom Project summed up “…the profanity and grotesque immorality and perversion make the show self-evidently unsuitable for children. On the other hand, the constant portrayal of young children’s genitals and similar imagery make it self-evidently unsuitable for adults. In short, it is unsuitable for anyone but the most depraved minds. The real goal appears to be to corrupt and sexualize more young children.”

Now, Netflix has entered what some would regard as infuriating uncharted territory with the Netflix Original series “Dancing Queen,” a series that focuses on a dance teacher from Texas who walks a fine line in promoting the normalization of young children and the drag queen lifestyle.

While the series doesn’t go as far as the lunacy of Michael Alig and the exploitation of Desmond the Amazing, “Dancing Queen” carefully introduces the relationship between Drag Queens and children to a larger audience.

And with the popularity of Desmond and the marketing for the show, Dancing Queen is either a horribly timed coincidence or is pushing the same subversive narrative found in other Netflix shows.

So with so many cut the cord offerings on the table, cutting off your Netflix subscription should be the first thing any red-blooded American with any sense of decency does posthaste.

It has never been easier to be a part of the problem if you continue to subscribe or the solution if you cancel today.

Big Tech caught in antitrust crosshairs of both Trump & Congress

CAP

Silicon Valley tech giants Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google are finding themselves targets of antitrust probes by both the Trump administration and Democrats, in what appears to be a power struggle ahead of the 2020 election.

Although the committee did not name any companies, chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-New York) spoke of “a handful of gatekeepers” who gained control “over key arteries of online commerce, content, and communications.”

Apple shares down after report reveals planned DOJ antitrust probe

House Republicans, usually at odds with Nadler over his investigations into President Donald Trump, seem to have embraced the probe with enthusiasm.

Mere rumors of a Justice Department probe of Google’s parent company Alphabet Inc. and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigation of Amazon and Facebook, caused a massive drop of major technology stocks on Monday, with billions of dollars in market valuation wiped out in minutes.

Alphabet stock was down by more than 6 percent, Facebook went down 7.5 percent, and Amazon dropped 4.6 percent by market closing time. Apple stocks were also down one percent amid rumors of an antitrust probe, even as the company got a bump due to new product announcements.

Conservative journalists and commentators were quick to point out that the antitrust investigations were likely related to the persistent censorship on social media platforms, though there is no direct evidence to that effect.

CAP

Silicon Valley tech giants have maintained that they have every right to police their platforms for “hate speech” and other “unacceptable” content, the definition of which keeps expanding by the day.

Democrats have put pressure on Big Tech to be more censorious – under the guise of rooting out “Russian bots and trolls” – after the 2016 election, when Trump used Twitter and Facebook to bypass the overwhelmingly negative mainstream media coverage and win the presidency. However, it then drew the anger of Republicans, who argued that the suspensions and bans have disproportionately targeted conservative voices.

As voice after voice gets purged from social media, still think there’s no censorship?

CAP

Most recently, Facebook banned any mention of Alex Jones or Infowars from its platforms, including Instagram, unless the posts were critical or hostile. The company also threatened to ban anyone who shared any Infowars content. Several other conservatives were removed in the same purge, and there were reports even photos and mentions of them would get deleted in the aftermath.

Facebook maintained that the ban was part of an ongoing campaign against “individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology.”

For some Democrats running for the 2020 presidential nomination, breaking up big tech has become a trendy rallying cry as they attempt to recruit those unhappy with the online expression monopoly. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has so far been the most aggressive in her offensive on tech giants, launching a social media campaign to break Facebook, Google, Amazon and Apple up. Other Democratic hopefuls jumped in, with the latest being Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), who last month said that he would “of course” back the proposal to disband Facebook. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) has sided with Warren, while a number of other Democrats, including presidential race frontrunner Joe Biden and Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) said that the idea is worth a serious look at least.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑