Tag: social media

Ontario residents cheering on the freedom protests on Facebook get a visit from police

Police in Ontario have admitted to scanning Facebook Groups for those that support the Freedom Convoy protests, finding their addresses and turning up at their doorstep to provide “information” about peaceful protests.

A viral video from a woman has been shared around social media, showing an officer turning up on the doorstep after the woman was taking part in a freedom-focussed Facebook group.

“This is just some information about peaceful protests. That’s all it is,” the officer said on the doorstep after handing the woman a flier.

“Okay, so you saw something on my Facebook,” the woman asked the officer.

“No, on the Facebook group,” the officer replied.

“Okay. And decided to come to my personal residence to give me information about peaceful protests,” the woman asked.

“Yes,” was the officer’s response.

“Are you guys now monitoring people’s Facebook pages or Facebook groups to who comments as to what their… status updates are or what they’re doing or within the group?” the shocked woman asked.

Keep reading

Canada’s online censorship bill is back

The Liberal Canadian government is resurrecting its online censorship bill that many were pleased died last year.

The new Bill – now called Bill C-11 – is aimed at regulating online platforms.

The purpose of Bill C-11 is to update the Broadcasting Act which was passed in 1991 before the internet was mainstream.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

If the bill passes, platforms that host content such as Netflix and Spotify, will be required to follow the content rules that traditional broadcasters follow as well as be forced to show a specified amount of local content and contributing cultural funds.

The Liberals claim that Bill C-11 addresses the free speech concerns that were raised about Bill C-10. In the new bill, user-generated content will be exempted from regulation by the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC).

Professor Michael Geist, from the University of Ottawa has disputed that the new proposals protect free speech.

“Indeed, for all the talk that user generated content is out, the truth is that everything from podcasts to TikTok videos fit neatly into the new exception that gives the CRTC the power to regulate such content as a ‘program,’” Geist wrote in a blog post.

Basically, the bill means the Canadian Radio and television and Telecommunications Commission will be granted permission to regulate a lot of social media content created by Canadians.

Keep reading

Here Are All The Times The Biden Administration Has Called For Tech Censorship

The Biden administration has frequently urged social media and technology companies to censor users, stressing the perceived dangers of “misinformation.”

White House press secretary Jen Psaki drew criticism after she said Tuesday that Spotify and other social media companies need to be “doing more” to stop the spread of “mis- and disinformation” on their platforms, echoing calls made in July for Facebook to remove posts containing vaccine misinformation. Psaki’s comments were in response to a question regarding backlash toward podcast host Joe Rogan, with whom Spotify has an exclusive contract, for hosting two guests who were skeptical of the COVID-19 vaccine’s safety and efficacy.

“Our hope is that all major tech platforms and all major news sources for that matter be responsible and be vigilant,” Psaki said.

Keep reading

YouTube’s new censorship tactic is to limit streams that are too popular

YouTube has a brand new censorship tactic that appears to be affecting small creators – and one that, on the face of it, makes no sense.

Several livestreams posted on Google’s platform last weekend by truckers protesting in Canada have had their audience limited. The reason given to viewers trying to access the videos? They were too popular.

“Video unavailable: This video is popular! Due to limited creator history, we’re limiting the number of viewers,” YouTube’s message reads, and then advises visitors to subscribe to the channel “to help this creator reach a broader audience.”

No word, though, on whether that would make the videos available to that broader audience, or if YouTube would come up with yet more “censorship gymnastics” while trying to suppress content it might not approve of.

Some incredulous Twitter users reacted by saying they were waiting for confirmation that the message was “a thing and not a meme.”

However, it definitely is a thing – and it’s not hard to see how YouTube would disapprove of the particular streams from the Ottawa protests, since they were organized by truckers opposed to Covid vaccine mandates. Reports mention that the giant platform limited viewership of at least two creators both livestreaming from the “Trucker Freedom Convoy” events.

Keep reading

Graphika: The Deep State’s Beard for Controlling the Information Age

Graphika is the toast of the town. The private social-media and tech-intelligence agency that tracks down bots and exposes foreign influence operations online is constantly quoted, referenced and profiled in the nation’s most important outlets. For example, in 2020, The New York Times published a fawning profile of the company’s head of investigations, Ben Nimmo. “He Combs the Web for Russian Bots. That Makes Him a Target,” ran its headline, the article presenting him as a crusader risking his life to keep our internet safe and free. Last year, business magazine Fast Company labeled Graphika as among the 10 most innovative companies in the world.

There is no doubt that Graphika leans into this cool and dynamic corporate image. From its beginnings in 2013, the company has expanded to employ dozens of people at its trendy Manhattan office. Describing themselves as “cartographers of the internet age,” the company puts out investigation after investigation about foreign influence operations online, especially concentrating on Russian, Chinese or Iranian attempts to manipulate social media. A layperson could certainly be blinded by its science and impressed by the complex and innovative graphs and charts. Yet when it comes to similar but far larger U.S. government programs, the intelligence and analysis agency is silent.

Keep reading

Capitol Police examines backgrounds, social media feeds of some who meet with lawmakers

After the Jan. 6 insurrection, the Capitol Police’s intelligence unit quietly started scrutinizing the backgrounds of people who meet with lawmakers, according to three people familiar with the matter.

POLITICO also viewed written communications describing the new approach, part of a host of changes that the department implemented after the Capitol attack. Examining the social media feeds of people who aren’t suspected of crimes, however, is a controversial move for law enforcement and intelligence officials given the civil liberties concerns it raises.

Among those who have been subject to new Capitol Police scrutiny are Hill staffers, the three people said. All spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter.

Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.) said in an interview that he is unaware of any members who know about the “very, very bad” practice.

Keep reading

Censorship By Algorithm Does Far More Damage Than Conventional Censorship

People make a big deal any time a controversial famous person gets removed from a major social media platform, and rightly so; we cannot allow such brazen acts of censorship to become normalized. The goal is to normalize internet censorship on every front, and the powerful will push for that normalization to be expanded at every opportunity. Whether you dislike the controversial figure being deplatformed on a given day is entirely irrelevant; it’s not about them, it’s about expanding and normalizing internet censorship protocols on monopolistic government-tied speech platforms.

But far, far more consequential than overt censorship of individuals is censorship by algorithm. No individual being silenced does as much real-world damage to free expression and free thought as the way ideas and information which aren’t authorized by the powerful are being actively hidden from public view, while material which serves the interests of the powerful is the first thing they see in their search results. It ensures that public consciousness remains chained to the establishment narrative matrix.

It doesn’t matter that you have free speech if nobody ever hears you speak. Even in the most overtly totalitarian regimes on earth you can say whatever you want alone in a soundproof room.

That’s the biggest loophole the so-called free democracies of the western world have found in their quest to regulate online speech. By allowing these monopolistic megacorporations to become the sources everyone goes to for information (and even actively helping them along that path as in for example Google’s research grants from the CIA and NSA), it’s possible to tweak algorithms in such a way that dissident information exists online, but nobody ever sees it.

Keep reading

Instagram says it will cut the reach of posts that are “likely” to contain “hate speech”

Instagram is introducing more vaguely defined restrictions on its users, this time acting “proactively” to lower Feed posts and Stories that “may” contain bullying or hate speech, or those which “may” encourage violence – as well as content that is “potentially upsetting.”

In a blog post, Facebook’s platform said that this means the already existing policy of reducing the reach of posts determined to contain misinformation by third-party “fact-checkers” – and all posts from accounts that are said to have shared misinformation “repeatedly” – is being expanded.

It is Instagram’s “systems” that will be tasked with making the distinction between what “may” or is “likely” or “potentially” contains hate speech and represents bullying. The blog post explains that (algorithms) will make these decisions by comparing captions – if a caption is similar to another that was already found to be violating the platform’s rules, then the post will be pushed down Feeds and Stories.

Instagram also said that the new policy, that smacks of shadow-banning, affects individual posts and not accounts themselves, and that posts Instagram actually thinks break its rules, rather than suspect them to, will be removed, as before.

Keep reading

Don’t Underestimate How Badly The Powerful Need Control Of Online Speech

Seems like almost every day now the mass media are blaring about the need for speech on the internet to be controlled or restricted in some way. Today they’re running stories about Joe Rogan and Covid misinformation; tomorrow it will be something else.

The reasons for the need to control online speech change from day to day, but the demand for that control remains a constant. Some days it’s a need to protect the citizenry from online disinformation campaigns by foreign governments. Sometimes it’s the need to guarantee election security. Sometimes it’s the need to eliminate domestic extremism and conspiracy theories. Sometimes it’s Covid misinformation. The problems change, but the solution is always the same: increased regulation of speech by monopolistic online platforms in steadily increasing coordination with the US government.

Keep reading

We Have to Speak in Code — Citizens With Reported Vaccine Injuries Being Silenced on Social Media

By now, nearly everyone who doesn’t simply post cat pictures and what they ate for dinner on social media, has likely experienced some sort of censorship. From a warning about a comment to having your entire social media account wiped from the internet, the algorithms protecting the established narrative lay waste to any and all rational discourse.

Perhaps one of the most egregious examples of this censorship is the silencing of those who report vaccine injuries. Last year, mainstream media cheered on the silencing and removal of groups on Facebook where folks could talk about their alleged injuries from the jab.

The outlet who claims to be a panacea of progressivism and free speech, Vox, wrote an article praising Facebook for “cracking down hard” on folks who would dare raise questions about the safety of a vaccine. Now, however, Vox and the rest of the pro-censorship elite, look ignorant as claim after claim about the jabs has fallen apart over the last year.

We were told that you couldn’t get covid if you got the vaccine. That was not true. We were told that taking the jab would get our freedoms back. They never came. We were told it would stop the spread. It did not. 

What’s more, the sheer numbers of injuries reported to the government should be enough to raise countless red flags.

Late last month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released new data showing a total of 1,207,779  reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines. They were submitted between Dec. 14, 2020, and Dec. 31, 2021, to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

This most recent dats included a total of 21,382 reports of deaths and 166,606 reports of serious injuries, including deaths, during the same time period.

Keep reading