CENSORSHIP – FACEBOOK BANS ZERO HEDGE FROM PLATFORM IN CONTINUED PURGE AGAINST REAL NEWS

Facebook Bans Zero Hedge From Platform In Continued Purge Against Real News

Popular guerrilla news outlet marked as ‘spam’ that violates ‘community standards’

Infowars.com – MARCH 11, 2019

Facebook suddenly blocked the sharing of Zero Hedge articles on its platform Monday, claiming the outlet violates its community standards.

When a Zero Hedge article is linked on Facebook, instead of showing the content, a message pops up saying: “the link you tried to visit goes against our community standards.”

CAP

It’s unclear why Facebook decided to mark Zero Hedge as spam, as the platform has yet to issue a statement on the matter.

It’s possible Facebook has simply determined that Zero Hedge must be silenced due to its relentless coverage of Facebook’s many problems, including privacy violations, mass abandonment by younger users, systematic censorship, and shady government cooperation.

The move is nonetheless significant: even Infowars content can still be shared on Facebook despite being banned by nearly all major social media platforms, including Facebook.

THE TRUTH BEHIND OLIVER DARCY

The Truth Behind Oliver Darcy

The CNN reporter’s past is quite revealing

 | Infowars.com – MARCH 8, 2019

The banishment of grassroots conservatives from social media platforms has caused many to ask, why?

At the center of the controversy is CNN’s Oliver Darcy who has spearheaded efforts to have Infowars and Alex Jones banned.

But who is Oliver Darcy?

A deeper look into his past reveals how the establishment is using both sides to purge the right of blue-collar conservatives.

Project Veritas Slams Twitter Execs’ Spying Claims

See the source image

Jack Dorsey, Vijaya Gadde claim direct messages aren’t monitored

Thursday, March 07, 2019

Twitter founder Jack Dorsey and chief legal officer Vijaya Gadde told podcast host Joe Rogan that direct messages on the social media site are not monitored — a claim challenged by investigative journalist James O’Keefe of Project Veritas.

When asked by Rogan if company employees “read direct messages,” Dorsey replied, “We don’t read direct messages.”

Gadde followed up, explaining that the only direct messages read by employees are those which have been reported to Twitter support.

Rogan pressed further, asking if it was possible for Twitter employees to intentionally peruse a user’s direct messages.

“I don’t think so,” Gadde replied.

However, according to multiple Twitter engineers who discussed the subject of direct messages with undercover Project Veritas journalists, Dorsey and Gadde may have been misleading with their answers, at best.

“There’s teams dedicated to it [reading direct messages],” said Clay Haynes, a senior network security engineer at Twitter. “I mean, we’re talking… at least three or four hundred people… they’re paid to look at dick pics.”

“It is creepy Big Brother.”

Pranay Singh, a direct messaging engineer, revealed that all content shared on the platform — including private messages — are stored on Twitter servers for analytical and advertising purposes.

“So all your sex messages and your dick pics are on my server now,” Singh said. “Everything. Anything you post online.”

“A machine is going to look at it. An algorithm will look at it, and they’ll make a virtual profile about you.”

Watch the full exchange here.

‘We were way too aggressive’: Twitter CEO admits conservatives were targeted

CAP

Twitter co-founder and CEO Jack Dorsey addressed claims his social media platform had targeted conservatives, admitted they had likely acted too swiftly in banning some right-wing users, and failed to explain their reasons.

In conversation with podcast host Joe Rogan, Dorsey and his chief legal officer Vijaya Gadde fielded questions and criticisms regarding widespread accusations of the company catering to liberal viewpoints.

“Probably our team having a lack of context into actually what’s happening” Dorsey explained. “We would fully admit we probably were way too aggressive when we first saw this as well, and made mistakes.”

The controversy surrounding the social media giant came after conservatives and those expressing conservative viewpoints complained their accounts had been suspended for ideological reasons. Columbia University researcher Richard Hanania recently published an analysis showing that, of the 22 public figures banned by Twitter in the last few years, 21 were Trump supporters.

Conspiracy theory talk show host and Trump supporter Alex Jones (who, ironically, was on Rogan’s show just a few days ago) had his account suspended last year, alongside other figures like right wing activist Laura Loomer and GOP congressional candidate Jesse Kelly. In Kelly’s case, the company failed to explain the ban, even after Kelly’s account was later reinstated.

ALSO ON RT.COMIraq War vet who called out social media censorship booted from Twitter

“A lot of where we have failed is explaining the ‘why’ behind our policy and reasons,” Dorsey admitted, promising to look into alleged excesses.

As a case example of the kind of bias in question, Rogan and his fellow guest journalist Tim Pool brought up the company’s policy against “misgenderding,” a term for referring to or addressing Transgender people as something other than the gender they identify with. Canadian Feminist Megan Murphy was recent booted from Twitter over accusations she had “misgendered” her opponent in a debate.

Gadde explained that the rule in question was only enforced if a specific person is repeatedly targeted in a way that could be considered harassment. Tim Pool was unconvinced.

“You’re biased, and you’re targeting specific individuals because your rules support this perspective,” he argued, suggesting that the rule itself reflected a liberal viewpoint.

“You have essentially created a protected class,” Rogan chimed in, highlighting how the company’s claims to political neutrality are undermined by the one-sided way it has enforced its policy against “targeted harassment.”

CNN’s Alisyn Camerota Urges Rashida Tlaib to Walk Back Apology, Declare Mark Meadows Racist

Alisyn Camerota CNN (Michael Loccisano / Getty)

By Joel B. Pollak

CNN’s New Day co-anchor Alisyn Camerota attempted Thursday morning to encourage Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MN) to undo her apology to Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) the day before, when she suggested he was a racist.

Meadows had brought Lynne Patton, a senior Trump campaign aide and now an administration official, to submit a statement into the record at the House Oversight Committee defending President Donald Trump from claims by his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, that Trump is a racist. Patton happens to be black and has defended Trump before.

Tlaib — who has faced accusations of antisemitism after making insensitive remarks about Israel — shocked the hearing by calling Patton a “prop” and suggesting it had been racist for Meadows to bring her to the hearing. She cited her own feelings as a “woman of color.” (Tlaib is a Palestinian-American.) Meadows, visibly hurt, noted he has relatives who are “people of color.” Tlaib apologized to Meadows (though not to Patton herself).

The left then tried to target Meadows, circulating a video from 2012 in which he told a Tea Party gathering that they would “send Mr. Obama home to Kenya or wherever it is.” CNN’s Anderson Cooper picked up the video and aired it Wednesday night, noting that Meadows had later regretted his remark and asserted his belief that Obama is an American citizen, but suggesting that Meadows might indeed be a racist for reasons other than Tlaib’s attack.

On Thursday morning, Camerota hosted Tlaib on New Day. Unlike Cooper, Camerota actually mentioned Patton, playing a clip from a radio show Thursday morning in which Patton had objected to being called a “prop.” Cameron described Patton as “the woman who was held up by Mark Meadows without speaking.” Tlaib did not apologize to Patton but asserted that she meant “no disrespect to her at all” to Patton, a remark Camerota did not challenge.

Camerota went on to argue to Tlaib that Meadows was, indeed, a racist, and asked her if she regretted her apology.

First, she asserted to Tlaib that “[t]here were people at home that felt that that was tone deaf and insensitive of congressman mark meadows,” i.e. bringing Patton to the meeting. “You certainly were not alone in that feeling and so why did you apologize to him?” Camerota cited no evidence of how “people at home” felt. When Tlaib offered an evasive answer, Camerota pressed her: “So do you regret apologizing to Congressman Meadows?”

Tlaib said that she “apologized if I made him feel like a racist,” saying that she saw the exchange as a “teachable moment” and did not want to label Meadows as a racist. She added that she was offended by Patton being brought to the hearing and “saying nothing,” evidently ignoring the fact that Patton had a statement entered into the record.

That did not satisfy Camerota, who then brought up the 2012 video: “I’m interested in whether or not you can separate a racist statement or a racist act from the person. And case in point, in 2012, you know, Congressman Mark Meadows engaged in the Birtherism talk where he doubted that President Obama was born here. let me just remind our viewers of what he said back then.” She played the clip, then asked: “Does seeing that change how you feel about him?”

Tlaib declined to take the bait, ignoring the 2012 video: “Congressman Meadows understood where i was coming from, he knew what my intention was at the end, and that’s why he decided to take …  his objections back.”

And still Camerota pressed Tlaib: “But just to be clear, you still today feel that he is not racist?”

Tlaib responded: “Look, I feel like the act was. and that’s up to the American people to decide whether or not he is.”

It was not enough for CNN, Cooper, or Camerota that Tlaib and Meadows had reconciled amongst themselves, with the mediation of committee chair Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD). Using a 2012 video that had no relevance to the exchange Wednesday, CNN tried to attack Meadows and to insert racial division where it had been partly healed.

‘Unlike CNN, we get to tell the truth!’ Now-unblocked Maffick hosts flip off censors

CAP

Two Maffick Media hosts wasted no time tearing into the alliance of mainstream media and neocon think tanks that silenced them for 10 days for breaking a Facebook rule they say didn’t exist until after their page was removed.

Rania Khalek and Anissa Naouai of In the Now and Soapbox took aim at the “lazy report from CNN” inspired by “pro-war think tanks” that led Facebook to remove four pages published by Maffick Media for being part-owned by RT’s video agency Ruptly and not having it written in all caps on their logo – a “crime” that wasn’t actually against Facebook’s rules – without bothering to inform Maffick beforehand.

In a sarcastic retort to the corporate-government censorship alliance, they highlighted the absurdity of the 10-day ban, which claimed to take issue with the German-based company “hiding” its links to Russia – even though those connections had been common knowledge since a 2016 Buzzfeed “exposé” that also reported publicly available information as if it were a big secret.

“Unlike CNN, we get to tell the truth about war and corporations because we don’t rely on advertising dollars from weapons companies,” Khalek said, pointing out that “all media is funded by corporations or governments” and asking Facebook to at least make other pages jump through the same hoops. Naouai said CNN’s own parent company, AT&T, “helped the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping of Americans.”

Maffick’s pages were quietly restored on Monday with the addition of a line on their “about us” page disclosing their funding sources – a rule that didn’t exist before In the Now, SoapBox, Back Then, and Waste-Ed were de-platformed, and which hasn’t been applied to other outlets like BBC or Al-Jazeera, which are funded by governments.

“CNN wouldn’t care if we were funded by Japan,” Khalek noted. The hosts gave a spirited obscene gesture to their censors and hinted that CNN’s inability to grasp the Streisand effect may ultimately have helped them.

CAP

Liberals Pinning All Hopes, Dreams On Testimony Of Seedy Lawyer

U.S.—Liberals across the country are pinning all their hopes and wildest dreams on the testimony of a lone, sleazy attorney, sources confirmed Wednesday.

As Michael Cohen arrived to give his testimony before the House, Democrats all over the nation said a prayer to no one in particular that the completely unreliable testimony of a sleazeball lawyer would singlehandedly bring down the Trump presidency, causing the nation to instantly transform into a progressive utopia with free healthcare, college, and cell phones for all.

“I just really need this,” said one woman in Portland, Oregon. “It’s been a really tough couple years for me under the Trump Reich. I mean, I am making more money than I was before, and I have more full-time employment opportunities, but that’s literally oppression because Trump.”

Various Twitter accounts with blue checkmarks excitedly tweeted that the suspect testimony of a lone lawyer who until recently associated with the “orange man” they hate so much would bring his whole presidency crashing to the ground.

At publishing time, the nation’s conservatives had announced they would be pinning all their hopes and dreams on the moral character of their president, who until recently associated with the sleazy lawyer.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑