Tag: censorship

New York Democrat introduces new social media censorship bill

The bill sponsored by state Senator Brad Hoylman wants to tackle what’s referred to as unlawful online content such as “misinformation” (particularly around Covid/vaccines), and posts that might allegedly lead users to develop eating disorders or engage in self-harm.

Envisaged in the bill is an amendment to New York’s penal code that lets citizens, the state attorney general and city corporation councils sue tech companies behind social media networks, or individuals, if they are suspected of “contributing” to spread of misinformation in a manner that’s “knowing or reckless.”

And while the bill is worded in a way that states content seen as endangering people’s safety or health should be clamped down on if it is “promoted” – including (but not exclusively) by means of algorithms and other methods of recommendation, experts say the distinction between that and any post created by users is not clear enough to stand up to legal scrutiny.

Keep reading

Florida School Board Moves to Censor Speakers and Prohibit Broadcast of Public Comments

In response to months of public backlash from parents and residents opposed to forced student masking, School Board members in Palm Beach County, Florida, are proposing new rules to censor and limit the public’s ability to voice their opinions and prohibit broadcasting of all public comments.

According to the School Board of Palm Beach County website, “speakers will not be denied the opportunity to speak on the basis of their viewpoint.” Pursuant to Florida statute § 286.0114, “the public shall be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard on a proposition before a board or commission.” Florida statute § 286.011 states that all meetings of public boards or commissions must be open to the public and the minutes of the meetings must be taken, promptly recorded, and open for public inspection.

The new policy, being drafted by school board attorneys, would limit the number of people who would be allowed to speak at public meetings and the amount of time they are allowed to speak. The new rules would also prohibit any speaker from addressing any board member by name, criticizing any board member, superintendent, or district staff member, and would prohibit the broadcasting of all public comments during all board meetings.

Keep reading

Twitter sued, accused of acting ‘on behalf’ of US govt

Former New York Times reporter and outspoken critic of the US response to the Covid pandemic Alex Berenson is suing Twitter for suspending his account, claiming the platform “acted on behalf of the federal government.

In the lawsuit, filed this week in the Northern District of California, Berenson accused Twitter of breach of contract and of violating his First Amendment rights.

The alleged breach of contract stems from the fact that Berenson claims a Twitter executive had repeatedly assured him that he would be free to express his views on the platform without fear of retaliation. 

“Despite the controversy around his statements, a senior Twitter executive repeatedly assured Mr. Berenson that the company backed his right to free expression and that he would continue to enjoy access to the platform,” Berenson’s lawyers said in the suit. 

The independent reporter and best-selling author was reportedly suspended from Twitter in August over a tweet questioning whether Covid vaccines could actually prevent infection and transmission of the virus, referring to them as “therapeutic” drugs. A Twitter spokesperson at the time said Berenson was permanently suspended for “repeated violations of our COVID-19 misinformation rules.”

In the tweet, Berenson wrote: “It doesn’t stop infection. Or transmission. Don’t think of it as a vaccine. Think of it – at best – as a therapeutic with a limited window of efficacy and terrible side effect profile that must be dosed IN ADVANCE OF ILLNESS.”

Berenson argues the platform acted on behalf of the Biden administration in censoring his posts, as the president himself had criticized “misinformation” about Covid spreading on social media only days before the author’s suspension. 

He is also claiming in his lawsuit that a California law applying to “common carriers” applies to Twitter. The legislation, dating back to 1872, regulates companies that “offer to the public to carry persons, property, or messages.”

Keep reading

DOD Issues New Policy on Extremism That Includes ‘Likes’

The Pentagon has updated its policy regarding extremism among military personnel.

The revised policy comes as the result of a Counter Extremist Activity Working Group established in the Spring by Defense Sec. Lloyd Austin.

Officials say the new policy does not seek to focus on any one ideology, thought, or political orientation, but to define more clearly what qualifies as prohibited extremist activity.

A report issued Dec. 20 provides a lengthy definition of “extremist activities” that range from advocating or engaging in political violence to knowingly displaying paraphernalia, words, or symbols in support of extremist activity.

This can include “liking” content on the internet, according to Pentagon press secretary John Kirby.

“The physical act of liking is, of course, advocating,” Kirby told reporters Monday. “And advocating for extremist groups—certainly groups that advocate violating the oath of the Constitution, overthrowing the government, terrorist activities. Liking is an advocation.”

According to the report, extremist activity can include posting, liking, sharing, re-tweeting, or otherwise distributing content—when such action is taken with the intent to promote or otherwise endorse extremist activities.

Keep reading

Amazon deleted reviews of Chinese president’s book on government’s orders

Didn’t like Chinese President Xi Jinping’s book? Keep your mouth shut.

That’s what China told Amazon, according to a new report, when the country pushed the bookseller to delete all comments and reviews related to “The Governance of China,” a compendium of Xi’s speeches and writings.

Amazon complied. It’s another example of a US company bending to Chinese pressure in order to keep doing business in the huge and growing economy.

The government edict was delivered two years ago, according to the Reuters report citing two people familiar with the matter, but had never before been disclosed.

Now, on Amazon sites accessed within China, there are no reviews or star ratings for the book.

The censorship demand was made after some reviewers gave the leader’s tome less-than-stellar marks, two people familiar with the matter told Reuters.

It was a negative review that prompted the wholesale ban on reviews and ratings on the book, according to a source. The ban was for the book’s Amazon listing in China.

Keep reading

12 worst cases of Big Tech censorship in 2021

Silicon Valley Big Tech giants like Twitter and Facebook appear to have adopted an explicit policy to suppress conservative views and encourage the spread of leftist dogma, as several media reports have revealed.

In the early part of the year, anything related to the election was a major target for Big Tech censorship. Views that strayed from the accepted COVID-19 narrative fell squarely in Big Tech’s bullseye the whole year, as alternative treatments for the virus and questioning of mask mandates incurred a great deal of scrutiny from the heads of Silicon Valley. And the tech overlords did all they could to promote social wokeness, furiously attacking critiques of transgenderism as well as pro-life content.

Facebook bowed to its insufferably woke employees and decided to develop algorithms that allowed hatred for whites and conservatives while protecting favored left-wing groups from ridicule on the platform.

Former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey resigned in November, clearing the way for anti-conservative radical Parag Agrawal to take the helm, a move that conservatives immediately criticized. Before banning former President Donald Trump following the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, Twitter had censored Trump and his campaign 625 times, without censoring Joe Biden at all. Twitter also censored New York Post stories in the lead-up to the 2020 election that focused on the alleged corrupt business dealings of President Joe Biden and his son Hunter in Ukraine.

Keep reading

Facebook’s fake fact-checkers censor medical journal article on alleged safety issues with Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine study

This is a dangerous time, indeed, when self-proclaimed fact checkers and curators are permitted to control information in the name of what they claim is the public good.

This trend was relatively unheard of prior to 2016. Until that time, the shaping and censoring was largely done in an invisible way. Nobody admitted to it because the public wouldn’t have stood for it.

But a successful propaganda campaign I’ve described in my books The Smear and Slanted aimed to convince many in the public to accept third parties telling us what we can cannot know or see.

Obviously, corporate and political interests are behind the efforts, using them to keep the public from seeing or hearing information that is contrary to their paid interests.

This helps explain a lot about Facebook’s indefensible censorship of a factual investigation published in the prestigious British Medical Journal.

The article by Paul Thacker exposed alleged poor practices and quality control issues during Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine studies based on whistleblower documentation.

According to the article:

A regional director who was employed at the research organisation Ventavia Research Group has told The BMJ that the company falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators, and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported in Pfizer’s pivotal phase III trial. Staff who conducted quality control checks were overwhelmed by the volume of problems they were finding. After repeatedly notifying Ventavia of these problems, the regional director, Brook Jackson, emailed a complaint to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Ventavia fired her later the same day. Jackson has provided The BMJ with dozens of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings, and emails.

Paul Thacker, British Medical Journal

Of course this bombshell information is not what vaccine industry interests and their supporters in government and media wanted to be seen. (Pfizer has always denied any wrongdoing. Pfizer, the FDA and CDC all say all vaccines in use in the U.S. are safe and effective.)

Keep reading

Google Docs Notifications are Updated to Restrict Docs that Contain “hate speech” and “misleading” Content

Google has announced new notifications in Google Drive that show that the platform has restricted the sharing and access of files that violate its policies. In a blog post, the tech giant said that it will restrict the sharing of files that violate its Terms of Service and abuse program policies.

If a file is flagged for violating policies, the owner will still have full access but sharing will not be possible and those who already had a link will no longer have access.

The owner of the file will receive an email informing them their files have been restricted. They will be able to appeal the decision by requesting a review of their own document.

“When a Google Drive file is identified as violating Google’s Terms of Service or program policies, it may be restricted. When it’s restricted, you may see a flag next to the filename, you won’t be able to share it, and your file will no longer be publicly accessible, even to people who have the link,” the post states.

Keep reading

British Medical Journal criticizes Facebook over “inaccurate, incompetent and irresponsible” “fact-check” used to censor

The editor of The British Medical Journal (BMJ), one of the world’s oldest and most respected medical journals, has written a letter to Meta’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg to bring to his attention an “incorrect” fact-check on one of its reports.

The report was titled: “Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial.”

A former employee at Ventavia, a research company that helped with the trials of the Pfizer Covid vaccine, provided The BMJ with dozens of internal documents, photos, email, and recordings, that revealed “a host of poor clinical trial research practices occurring at Ventavia that could impact data integrity and patient safety,” according to the letter.

“We also discovered that, despite receiving a direct complaint about these problems over a year ago, the FDA did not inspect Ventavia’s trial sites,” the letter, written by BMJ editor Fiona Godlee, further claims.

The BMJ hired an investigative reporter to write the story, which was published on November 2. The article had been peer reviewed, legally reviewed, and subjected to The BMJ’s high editorial standards.

However, starting November 10, Facebook users started reporting problems when trying to share the article. Some said they were unable to share, others said their posts were flagged with a warning saying, “Missing context… Independent fact-checkers say this information could mislead people.” Others were warned about the consequences of repeatedly sharing “false information.”

The BMJ’s article was fact-checked by Lead Stories, a Facebook contractor. The BMJ described the fact-check performed by Lead Stories as “inaccurate, incompetent and irresponsible.”

Keep reading