Blacklisted: The Social Media Purge of 2018

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

Re: Blacklisted: The Social Media Purge of 2018

Postby Grizzly » Fri Dec 28, 2018 8:11 pm

Speaking of The House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) and McCarthesque optics, I just finished watching the following..,

The Blacklist

Raymond "Red" Reddington, one of the FBI's most wanted fugitives, surrenders in person at FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C. He claims that he and the FBI have the same interests: bringing down dangerous criminals and terrorists. In the last two decades, he's made a list of criminals and terrorists that matter the most but the FBI cannot find because it does not know they exist. Reddington calls this "The Blacklist".
Reddington will co-operate, but insists that he will speak only to Elizabeth Keen, a rookie FBI profiler.
don't think I'll finish it. I'm not easily entertained by Hollyweird productins and the same 7 plots over and over and... adinfinitum advertising built right into our eye orbs.
If Barthes can forgive me, “What the public wants is the image of passion Justice, not passion Justice itself.”
User avatar
Grizzly
 
Posts: 2623
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blacklisted: The Social Media Purge of 2018

Postby conniption » Wed Jan 23, 2019 6:40 pm

consortium news
(embedded links)

Narrative Control Firm Targeting Alternative Media
January 18, 2019 • 69 Comments

NewsGuard is led by some of the most virulently pro-imperialist individuals in America and its agenda to shore up narrative control for the ruling power establishment is clear, writes Caitlin Johnstone.

By Caitlin Johnstone
CaitlinJohnstone.com

The frenzied, hysterical Russia narrative being promoted day in and day out by Western mass media has had two of its major stories ripped to shreds in the last three days.

A report seeded throughout the mainstream media by anonymous intelligence officials back in September claimed that U.S. government workers in Cuba had suffered concussion-like brain damage after hearing strange noises in homes and hotels with the most likely culprit being “sophisticated microwaves or another type of electromagnetic weapon” from Russia. A recording of one such highly sophisticated attack was analyzed by scientists and turned out to be the mating call of the male indies short-tailed cricket. Neurologists and other brain specialists have challenged the claim that any U.S. government workers suffered any neurological damage of any kind, saying test results on the alleged victims were misinterpreted. The actual story, when stripped of hyperventilating Russia panic, is that some government workers heard some crickets in Cuba.

Another report which dominated news for a day recently claimed that former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort (the same Paul Manafort who the Guardian falsely claimed met with Julian Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy) had shared polling data with a Russian associate and asked him to pass it along to Oleg Deripaska, who is often labeled a “Russian oligarch” by western media. The polling data was mostly public already, and the rest was just more polling information shared in the spring of 2016, but Deripaska’s involvement had Russiagaters burning the midnight oil with breathless excitement. Talking Points Memo‘s Josh Marshall went so far as to publish an article titled “The ‘Collusion’ Debate Ended Last Night,” substantiating his click-generating headline with the claim that “What’s crystal clear is that the transfer to Kilimnik came with explicit instructions to give the information to Deripaska. And that’s enough.”

Except Manafort didn’t give any explicit instructions to share the polling data with Deripaska, but with two Ukrainian oligarchs (who are denying it). The New York Times was forced to print this embarrassing correction to the story it broke, adding in the process that Manafort’s motivation was likely not collusion, but money.

These are just the latest debacles as reporters eager to demonstrate their fealty to the U.S.-centralized empire fall all over themselves to report any story that makes Russia look bad without practicing due diligence. The only voices who have been questioning the establishment Russia narrative that is being fed to mass media outlets by secretive government agencies have been those which the mass media refuses to platform. Alternative media outlets are the only major platforms for dissent from the authorized narratives of the plutocrat-owned political/media class.

Imagine, then, how disastrous it would be if these last strongholds of skepticism and holding power to account were removed from the media landscape. Well, that’s exactly what a shady organization called NewsGuard is trying to do, with some success already.

continues... https://consortiumnews.com/2019/01/18/n ... ive-media/


~~~

mintpressnews
(embedded links)

Newsguard Exposed: How a NeoCon-Backed “Fact Checker” Plans to Wage War on Independent Media

As Newsguard’s project advances, it will soon become almost impossible to avoid this neocon-approved news site’s ranking systems on any technological device sold in the United States.

by Whitney Webb
January 09th, 2019

17 Comments

MINNEAPOLIS — Soon after the social media “purge” of independent media sites and pages this past October, a top neoconservative insider — Jamie Fly — was caught stating that the mass deletion of anti-establishment and anti-war pages on Facebook and Twitter was “just the beginning” of a concerted effort by the U.S. government and powerful corporations to silence online dissent within the United States and beyond.

While a few, relatively uneventful months in the online news sphere have come and gone since Fly made this ominous warning, it appears that the neoconservatives and other standard bearers of the military-industrial complex and the U.S. oligarchy are now poised to let loose their latest digital offensive against independent media outlets that seek to expose wrongdoing in both the private and public sectors.

As MintPress News Editor-in-Chief Mnar Muhawesh recently wrote, MintPress was informed that it was under review by an organization called Newsguard Technologies, which described itself to MintPress as simply a “news rating agency” and asked Muhawesh to comment on a series of allegations, several of which were blatantly untrue. However, further examination of this organization reveals that it is funded by and deeply connected to the U.S. government, neo-conservatives, and powerful monied interests, all of whom have been working overtime since the 2016 election to silence dissent to American forever-wars and corporate-led oligarchy.

More troubling still, Newsguard — by virtue of its deep connections to government and Silicon Valley — is lobbying to have its rankings of news sites installed by default on computers in U.S. public libraries, schools, and universities as well as on all smartphones and computers sold in the United States.

In other words, as Newsguard’s project advances, it will soon become almost impossible to avoid this neocon-approved news site’s ranking systems on any technological device sold in the United States. Worse still, if its efforts to quash dissenting voices in the U.S. are successful, Newsguard promises that its next move will be to take its system global.

Red light, green light . . .

Newsguard has received considerable attention in the mainstream media of late, having been the subject of a slew of articles in the Washington Post, the Hill, the Boston Globe, Politico, Bloomberg, Wired, and many others just over the past few months. Those articles portray Newsguard as using “old-school journalism” to fight “fake news” through its reliance on nine criteria allegedly intended to separate the wheat from the chaff when it comes to online news.

Newsguard separates sites it deems worthy and sites it considers unreliable by using a color-coded rating — green, yellow, or red — and more detailed “nutrition labels” regarding a site’s credibility or lack thereof. Rankings are created by Newsguard’s team of “trained analysts.” The color-coding system may remind some readers of the color-coded terror threat-level warning system that was created after 9/11, making it worth noting that Tom Ridge, the former secretary of Homeland Security who oversaw the implementation of that system under George W. Bush, is on Newsguard’s advisory board.

Image
Newsguard gives Fox News high marks for accuracy.

As Newsguard releases a new rating of a site, that rating automatically spreads to all computers that have installed its news ranking browser plug-in. That plug-in is currently available for free for the most commonly used internet browsers. NewsGuard directly markets the browser plug-in to libraries, schools and internet users in general.

According to its website, Newsguard has rated more than 2,000 news and information sites. However, it plans to take its ranking efforts much farther by eventually reviewing “the 7,500 most-read news and information websites in the U.S.—about 98 percent of news and information people read and share online” in the United States in English.

A recent Gallup study, which was supported and funded by Newsguard as well as the Knight Foundation (itself a major investor in Newsguard), stated that a green rating increased users likelihood to share and read content while a red rating decreased that likelihood. Specifically, it found 63 percent would be less likely to share news stories from red-rated websites, and 56 percent would be more likely to share news from green-rated websites, though the fact that Newsguard and one of its top investors funded the poll makes it necessary to take these findings with a grain of salt.

However, some of the rankings Newsguard itself has publicized show that it is manifestly uninterested in fighting “misinformation.” How else to explain the fact that the Washington Post and CNN both received high scores even though both have written stories or made statements that later proved to be entirely false? For example, CNN falsely claimed in 2016 that it was illegal for Americans to read WikiLeaks releases and unethically colluded with the DNC to craft presidential debate questions to favor Hillary Clinton’s campaign that same year.

In addition, in 2017, CNN published a fake story that a Russian bank linked to a close ally of President Donald Trump was under Senate investigation. That same year, CNN was forced to retract a report that the Trump campaign had been tipped off early about WikiLeaks documents damaging to Hillary Clinton when it later learned the alert was about material already publicly available.

The Washington Post, whose $600 million conflict of interest with the CIA goes unnoted by Newsguard, has also published false stories since the 2016 election, including one article that falsely claimed that “Russian hackers” had tapped into Vermont’s electrical grid. It was later found that the grid itself was never breached and the “hack” was only an isolated laptop with a minor malware problem. Yet, such acts of journalistic malpractice are apparently of little concern to Newsguard when those committing such acts are big-name corporate media outlets.

continues... https://www.mintpressnews.com/newsguard ... ia/253687/


~~~

https://www.rt.com/news/449530-newsguar ... ntegrated/

No need to install: Microsoft has controversial fake news filter NewsGuard built into mobile browser
Published time: 23 Jan, 2019
conniption
 
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blacklisted: The Social Media Purge of 2018

Postby elfismiles » Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:00 pm

Facebook Bans Zero Hedge
Profile picture for user Tyler Durden
by Tyler Durden
Tue, 03/12/2019 - 05:44

Over the weekend, we were surprised to learn that some readers were prevented by Facebook when attempting to share Zero Hedge articles. Subsequently it emerged that virtually every attempt to share or merely mention an article, including in private messages, would be actively blocked by the world's largest social network, with the explanation that "the link you tried to visit goes against our community standards."

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03- ... zero-hedge
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8412
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: Blacklisted: The Social Media Purge of 2018

Postby elfismiles » Wed Mar 20, 2019 3:43 pm

After Blocking Zero Hedge And Others, NZ Telcos Demand Big-Tech Censorship Surge To "Protect Consumers"
by Tyler Durden / Tue, 03/19/2019
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03- ... ship-surge
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8412
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: Blacklisted: The Social Media Purge of 2018

Postby conniption » Fri Jun 07, 2019 4:18 am

off-guardian

YouTube’s Latest Purge Video sharing platform enforces new rules against “extremist content”

Kit Knightly
Jun 5, 2019

83 comments

YouTube has just announced they have changed their “community standards” to combat “extremist content” on their platform. This is just the latest step in the war against free speech online.

This move comes as no surprise – the press have been laying the groundwork for this for weeks, even months...

continues: https://off-guardian.org/2019/06/05/you ... est-purge/
conniption
 
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blacklisted: The Social Media Purge of 2018

Postby DrEvil » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:05 pm

^^It has nothing to do with being against free speech. Youtube is removing content it doesn't want to be associated with (poorly, I might add, because they're too big to manually check everything and have to rely on algorithms that frequently fuck up), just like I would kick you out of my house if you were spouting racist gibberish. Free speech doesn't mean that you can force someone to listen to you, or to host your speech.

This forum right here bans people for being racists, misogynists or batshit crazy religious zealots, but I don't see anyone complaining about those people having their speech censored, and those people are still free to post their garbage on any number of other sites that allow that sort of thing, or to start their own site. That's the whole reason places like Gab or 8chan exist in the first place.

Government can't curtail legal speech, private entities can do whatever they like. Youtube can ban content for any reason whatsoever, because it's their platform, not yours. It's a constant source of amazement to me how many people don't get this.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 2640
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blacklisted: The Social Media Purge of 2018

Postby Elvis » Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:09 am

But — is YouTube effectively a monopoly? Their market power is very great. Not sure the present legal standing of Internet as public utility, but if Internet is a utility, and YouTube is a monopoly, then YouTube must yield to First Amendment guarantees. That gets a little messy, of course; YT would have to reinstate Alex Jones.

Maybe YouTube should be a publicly owned utility? It will be argued that YouTube is "publicly owned" because the "public" can buy shares of its stock. But maybe YouTube—as a main channel of a public utility—should be in the same public sphere as the airwave spectrum, and airspace itself, and paid for with public money.


It says here that the 2019 annual cost of running and maintaining YouTube is $6,350,000,000.

Annual revenue generated from YouTube is $4,000,000,000. In other words, ripe for a socialist takeover. :)
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 6121
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blacklisted: The Social Media Purge of 2018

Postby DrEvil » Wed Jul 17, 2019 8:24 am

Elvis » Wed Jul 17, 2019 8:09 am wrote:But — is YouTube effectively a monopoly? Their market power is very great. Not sure the present legal standing of Internet as public utility, but if Internet is a utility, and YouTube is a monopoly, then YouTube must yield to First Amendment guarantees. That gets a little messy, of course; YT would have to reinstate Alex Jones.

Maybe YouTube should be a publicly owned utility? It will be argued that YouTube is "publicly owned" because the "public" can buy shares of its stock. But maybe YouTube—as a main channel of a public utility—should be in the same public sphere as the airwave spectrum, and airspace itself, and paid for with public money.


It says here that the 2019 annual cost of running and maintaining YouTube is $6,350,000,000.

Annual revenue generated from YouTube is $4,000,000,000. In other words, ripe for a socialist takeover. :)


It's not a monopoly. It's the biggest fish in the pond, but there are plenty of other fish. It's not like actual public utilities like water or electricity that are both essential, and extremely expensive and pointless to build competing versions of. People are still free to put their videos on any number of competing sites, and it's fairly trivial to set up your own site to host your videos if no one else wants to. Just because you're not getting the largest audience possible doesn't mean you're being censored or having your free speech limited.

If they're forced to carry speech they don't want to, where do you draw the line? What about porn, Holocaust denial, ISIS torture porn, mosque shooting livestreams and creepy-ass pedophile stuff that's not strictly illegal? Should they have to carry everything that's not illegal? And if you include Facebook and Twitter in the argument, what about spam and bots?

I do agree that the internet itself should be classed as a public utility though.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 2640
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blacklisted: The Social Media Purge of 2018

Postby 82_28 » Mon Jul 22, 2019 7:27 am

Does anyone remember the "hey day" of Real Player? It still exists believe it or not in their Seattle HQ. But I remember the olden days when I would seek out privately shared clips that were coded by whatever Real coded it in. Now I regularly seek out some song or clip of something on YouTube. It's weird. I delivered there the other day. https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5899265 ... 384!8i8192

Sorry, that link is very lame.
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
User avatar
82_28
 
Posts: 11175
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:34 am
Location: North of Queen Anne
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blacklisted: The Social Media Purge of 2018

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Jul 22, 2019 7:30 am

82_28 !!!!

:lovehearts: :lovehearts: :lovehearts: :hug1: :hug1: :hug1:


How was Christmas? :)
does announcing genocide on twitter violate terms of service?
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 31696
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Blacklisted: The Social Media Purge of 2018

Postby Iamwhomiam » Mon Jul 22, 2019 9:10 am

82_28 !!!!

:lovehearts: :lovehearts: :lovehearts: :hug1: :hug1: :hug1:


:lovehearts: :lovehearts: :lovehearts: :hug1: :hug1: :hug1:

Redundancy is warranted!
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6031
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blacklisted: The Social Media Purge of 2018

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Jul 22, 2019 9:12 am

love fest redundancy is warranted!

Iamwhomiam


I am so glad your back around also

:lovehearts: :lovehearts: :lovehearts: :hug1: :hug1: :hug1:
does announcing genocide on twitter violate terms of service?
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 31696
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Blacklisted: The Social Media Purge of 2018

Postby 82_28 » Mon Jul 22, 2019 7:14 pm

Iamwhomiam » Mon Jul 22, 2019 5:10 am wrote:82_28 !!!!

:lovehearts: :lovehearts: :lovehearts: :hug1: :hug1: :hug1:


:lovehearts: :lovehearts: :lovehearts: :hug1: :hug1: :hug1:

Redundancy is warranted!


Awful. But thanks for asking. I just couldn't get depressed much more. I went through the blender. How was your Christmas? Also thank you, Kate and Jim. I'm gonna go on a banpalooza now.
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
User avatar
82_28
 
Posts: 11175
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:34 am
Location: North of Queen Anne
Blog: View Blog (0)

Previous

Return to Current Events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests