Censorship of videos on social media

IleneK

IleneK

Premium Member
blackbery said:
It's called:

'Narrative Industrial Complex'.

Like the Military Industrial Complex.

Only THEIR 'narrative' can be allowed. Only THEIR opinions matter.

ONLY the 'establishment' view can be accepted. ANY criticism of anything they deem credible is called a Conspiracy Theory.

Like with Covid 19. Many good doctors & scientists & everyday people banned from posting alternate treatments, even healthy, natural ones.

Fauci probably killed about 100,000 in the U.S. by banning HCQ when it has been PROVEN to help....but wasn't allowed. Same with steroids, etc.

We have to put our masks on, shut up & listen to the 'experts'....& only leave the house when we've had our vaccinations.

Only 'THEY', the experts can explain the truth to us. They want ONE WORLD VIEWPOINT aka The Great Reset.

After JFK's assassination, the CIA started calling EVERYONE who had a different opinion other than the Warren Commission a 'conspiracy theorist'.

Its 888-page final report was presented to President Johnson on September 24, 1964, and made public three days later. It concluded that President Kennedy was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald and that Oswald acted entirely alone. It also concluded that Jack Ruby acted alone when he killed Oswald two days later.

They have really gone overboard in the Trump era to play out their 'narrative' of President Trump as a nazi, racist, bigot, antisemite, etc etc.

I used to believe it until I watched the impeachment hearings from day one & saw what was happening & then would turn on MSM & get a totally different reality. I'm so glad I WOKE UP then & I realized that almost everything they had told me about Trump was a lie. Since then, I don't trust anything MSM say anymore. It's all biased to the Left, the 'establishment' in the USA. They drone on & on about how horrible & evil every Republican is while every Democrat is pure & white. In fact, the opposite is true & almost everything they accuse Trump of, they are guilty of themselves.

FOX USED to be free of bias & tell the truth. They had huge ratings because it was the only media outlet in the U.S. that didn't attack Trump & lie about him daily. But then even they changed, a couple of days before the election......
& guess what? Their ratings have dropped 40% as now they are just another Trump-Hating tv outlet.


Trump banned from Facebook indefinitely, CEO Mark Zuckerberg says
The move follows temporary bans of Trump’s accounts by both Twitter and Facebook


Charlie Kirk
@charliekirk11
·
5h
Ayatollah Khamenei is still allowed on Twitter & Instagram but Donald Trump is not. Think about that.


They banned Trump after he told the MAGA Rally to 'go home, we have to have peace, we have to respect law & order'.

https://www.wfsb.com/news/president...deo_6ed3f516-14b5-55c1-81d0-a903fb6ef28a.html
Click to expand...


It cuts both ways. Both sides censoring the other. Both sides accusing the other of lies. Both sides bending information to the way they see it. Both sides blaming the other. Like a big bunch of children.
We can all agree it is a pretty sad state of affairs.
 
B

blackbery

Well-known member
It's the billionaire, Pluto globalists who do all the banning & censoring.

There is NO positive news about Trump on ANY media outlet in North America, probably the entire Western World. The few world leaders that respect his policies are also labelled 'dangerous, neo-nazis, anti-semitic bigots & worse.

You CANNOT question the 'experts', the big-tech tin-pot dictators or the globalists about ANYTHING. You are branded as a troublemaker, a nutcase or a conspiracy theorist. Very sad.

Zach just dropped his newest video & poses the question: Will you think for yourself even if it differs from the masses?

https://youtu.be/iEfs-Z2ljAo





IleneK said:
It cuts both ways. Both sides censoring the other. Both sides accusing the other of lies. Both sides bending information to the way they see it. Both sides blaming the other. Like a big bunch of children.
We can all agree it is a pretty sad state of affairs.
Click to expand...
 
IleneK

IleneK

Premium Member
blackbery said:
It's the billionaire, Pluto globalists who do all the banning & censoring.

There is NO positive news about Trump on ANY media outlet in North America, probably the entire Western World. The few world leaders that respect his policies are also labelled 'dangerous, neo-nazis, anti-semitic bigots & worse.

You CANNOT question the 'experts', the big-tech tin-pot dictators or the globalists about ANYTHING. You are branded as a troublemaker, a nutcase or a conspiracy theorist. Very sad.

Zach just dropped his newest video & poses the question: Will you think for yourself even if it differs from the masses?

https://youtu.be/iEfs-Z2ljAo
Click to expand...
Social media/billionaires are critiqued in reputable publications. And there are pro-Trump conservative publications as well. If you broaden your reading domain you will see.
 
Last edited:
E

ElenaJ

Well-known member
Ilene, they keep censoring videos that don't say what they want.
It's happening with more and more speed since the electoral college vote.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
ElenaJ said:
Ilene, they keep censoring videos that don't say what they want.
It's happening with more and more speed since the electoral college vote.
Click to expand...

These social media platforms are private sector corporations. They can make their own editorial decisions.

That's also the case for broadcast news.

That's Capitalism.
 
Last edited:
D

david starling

Well-known member
I remember when they were all promoting the Iraq War.

News media is called the "Fourth Estate". It has the power to shape public opinion any way it chooses.
 
Last edited:
IleneK

IleneK

Premium Member
david starling said:
I remember when they were all promoting the Iraq War.

News media is called the "Fourth Estate". It has the power to shape public opinion any way it chooses.
Click to expand...


Well, I really have to respectfully disagree with this, David. The fourth estate, the print media, even when digital, is bound by libel and slander law and media ethics. A key element of formal print media ethics is to be unbiased. And although that may not be humanly possible, it is a formal aspiration of the fourth estate media ethics, even though they may be privately owned corporations. So they do NOT have the right to shape public opinion any way they choose. This is taking into consideration the editorializing that is part of the printed press.

Social media is not the fourth estate. It comes later, it is not restrained by libel and slander law. And so in that regard, it is free and has the power to to shape public opinion. Social media ought to have laws governing it and probably will. It is just so new that there has not been time for the society to really recognize with it is and then rise up and legislate law similar to printed media law.
 
Last edited:
IleneK

IleneK

Premium Member
ElenaJ said:
Ilene, they keep censoring videos that don't say what they want.
It's happening with more and more speed since the electoral college vote.
Click to expand...


Social media are allowed to censor. At this time they are perceived and treated more like a utility than a private business and so are given more leeway about their monopolistic power. As such they are also a platform for libel and slander and are not regulated by law in that regard like the printed press, which IS.

Since social media is censoring, why not go to the countless other reputable sources that don't censor? They are out there and you can read the coverage in print that you are seeking.
 
B

blackbery

Well-known member
Capitalist yes but they CANNOT make editorial decisions to ban or censor anyone based on their political views. They are NOT part of the 'News' but a public forum. Very different rules.

Trump TRIED to get this changed but the corrupt politicians like having big-tech on their side & suppressing any different viewpoint & refused to repeal Section 230.

It’s been called the “twenty-six words that created the internet.” Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act is a landmark U.S. law that shields social media companies such as Twitter and Facebook from liability for content their users post. The tech industry maintains that the provision allows the internet to flourish, but critics say companies either aren’t doing enough to combat harmful content, or are going too far with censorship.

https://www.cfr.org/in-brief/trump-and-section-230-what-know










david starling said:
These social media platforms are private sector corporations. They can make their own editorial decisions.

That's also the case for broadcast news.

That's Capitalism.
Click to expand...
 
Dirius

Dirius

Well-known member
IleneK said:
Social media are allowed to censor. At this time they are perceived and treated more like a utility than a private business and so are given more leeway about their monopolistic power. As such they are also a platform for libel and slander and are not regulated by law in that regard like the printed press, which IS.

Since social media is censoring, why not go to the countless other reputable sources that don't censor? They are out there and you can read the coverage in print that you are seeking.
Click to expand...


But they are able to do this, only because they have special protections granted by the government. Why do they have these protections to begin with? Perhaps because they donate a lot of cash to politicians? (bribes?) :whistling:
 
Dirius

Dirius

Well-known member
david starling said:
These social media platforms are private sector corporations. They can make their own editorial decisions.

That's also the case for broadcast news.

That's Capitalism.
Click to expand...

If they have editorial capabilities, they should be liable for the content which is uploaded to their site (like any editorial website would). Currently, the U.S. government has created special laws which prevent this.

If they only want to be a "plataform" for people to upload or discuss content, without any form of liability for the content that is uploaded there (such as copyrighted material), then they shouldn't be able to have editorial powers.

A special protection from government isn't "capitalism", its corporate cronysm. Capitalism is about getting government out of the economy.
 
Last edited:
IleneK

IleneK

Premium Member
Dirius said:
But they are able to do this, only because they have special protections granted by the government. Why do they have these protections to begin with? Perhaps because they donate a lot of cash to politicians? (bribes?) :whistling:
Click to expand...
Quite honestly, that is as good an explanation as any. I'm not defending; only describing.
Everyone with a lot of cash uses their money to get what they want from politicians now that independent-expenditure-only political committees (sometimes called “Super PACs”) may accept unlimited contributions, including from corporations and labor organizations.
 
Dirius

Dirius

Well-known member
IleneK said:
Quite honestly, that is as good an explanation as any. I'm not defending; only describing.
Everyone with a lot of cash uses their money to get what they want from politicians now that independent-expenditure-only political committees (sometimes called “Super PACs”) may accept unlimited contributions, including from corporations and labor organizations.
Click to expand...

But that means that the reason they are censoring people is born out of their corrupted relationship with the government.
 
B

blackbery

Well-known member

FREE SPEECH is officially dead in the U.S.A. now.:crying::crying::crying:

America has now become Communist China.:sick:

SAD DAY when the tin-pot dictators of big-tech can ban the POTUS from Twitter, FB, Instagram. And I would say this no matter who was POTUS.

I don't read or follow anything from Biden/Harris but that's my choice. Choice has now been taken away by the Tech Oligarchs &
WE MUST ONLY LISTEN to & READ WHAT THEY TELL US TO.:sick:

NOBODY could have more power than the POTUS who haven't been elected by the people & who are driven by personal hate for Trump. What gives these sociopaths like Jack Dorsey, Zuckerberg the right to tell US, THE PEOPLE, who we can & cannot listen to. :crying:

We are back in 1960s Soviet Union.


Not only did they ban Trump permanently but numerous (100s) of Trump Patriots including the ones I used to follow. AND ANYONE with the word 'Patriot' in their name got banned too.

General Flynn, Powell, Codemonkey, Praying Medic, Ben Garrison, Qtah, x22 Report, intotheMatrixxx, Vincent Kennedy, Enoch, PepeNewsNow, TechnoFrog, Tracy Beanz ALL BANNED.


I feel so sick about this but not much anyone can do as they have the monopoly.

But, hey, eventually, they will turn against the Dems & then they will ban them too.

Then the only people left will be Jack & Zuckerberg & the dictators & the anti-semites & the bigots & the Communists who are still allowed to post on their platforms. But not the President of the most powerful democracy in the world.
:eek::rolleyes::mad::confused:




ELIJAH SCHAFFER
@ElijahSchaffer
Facebook & Instagram have permanently suspended me from their platforms w/out explanation

It was mostly just pictures of my wife, dog and memories of my mom who recently died



J.L.Weimer🎙
@JLsPerspective
·
Jan 8
Replying to
@ElijahSchaffer
Big Tech is the new Institution “Church & Religion” they will erase and create data as they want now. They completely and erroneously censor people without any justification. Someone in their office all depressed taking vendettas on any platform, without admitting it,a disgrace!







But big tech is relentless. Reporting the truth is now illegal



ElenaJ said:
Ilene, they keep censoring videos that don't say what they want.
It's happening with more and more speed since the electoral college vote.
Click to expand...
 
Dirius

Dirius

Well-known member
IleneK said:
You must know that Trump is no less corrupt and any other of the politicians. They all can be bought at some price.
Click to expand...

He is the only person in government whose networth has actually gone down, since he got elected to office. Doesn't seem very corrupt to me.

He is also not a politician. He is not someone who dedicated his career to going through the "cursus honorum" while working in government. He is just an elected official.

edit: did the post I quoted got deleted? D:
 
Top