Tag: social media

New Yorker’s Doreen St. Félix Deletes X Account After Racist Tweets Resurface

Doreen St. Félix, a staff writer at the far-left New Yorker, deleted her X account this week after a countless number of racist tweets were uncovered.

St. Félix, who’s been with the New Yorker since 2017, has not commented on her objectively racist views, views that not only denigrate an entire race of people based only on their skin color, but put forth an equally grotesque opinion that her own ethnicity awards her and those who look like her a racial supremacy.

What’s most revealing — this time about the state of our wretched legacy media — is that just a year or so after St. Félix openly expressed these racist and supremacist views, she was still hired by the New Yorker and even earned a place on Forbes “30 Under 30” list.

Here’s a short list of her greatest hits:

April 7, 2015: “tbh whiteness fills me with a lot of hate. can’t really be a prude about it anymore. i’m often angry and hateful about it.”

December 24, 2014: “I hate white men. You all are the worst. Go nurse your fucking Oedipal complexes and leave the earth to the browns and the women.”

June 4, 2015: “white people, who literally started a plague because they couldn’t wipe their asses, need never say they taught black people hygiene.”

January 13, 2015: “Of course white people don’t bathe. It’s in their blood. Their lack of hygiene literally started the bubonic plague, lice, syphilis, etc.”

March 10, 2015: “i would be heartbroken if i had kids with a white guy and they didn’t look phenotypically back. I want them to look like me, my parents.”

Keep reading

Reddit Slams the Door on Internet Archivers

Reddit is sharply reducing what the Internet Archive can store, blocking the Wayback Machine from saving most of the site.

Only the Reddit.com homepage will remain available for archiving, meaning the public record will no longer include individual posts, comment sections, or user profiles.

The change effectively strips away the ability to look back at the full discussions that once played out on the platform, leaving little more than a daily snapshot of trending headlines.

The company says it is responding to AI developers who have been using the Wayback Machine as a backdoor to harvest Reddit data. “Internet Archive provides a service to the open web, but we’ve been made aware of instances where AI companies violate platform policies, including ours, and scrape data from the Wayback Machine,” said Reddit spokesperson Tim Rathschmidt.

He added, “Until they’re able to defend their site and comply with platform policies (e.g., respecting user privacy, re: deleting removed content), we’re limiting some of their access to Reddit data to protect redditors.”

This crackdown is not unique to Reddit. Across the internet, more companies and publishers are locking their content behind paywalls or gated APIs, arguing that AI firms are exploiting open access to train their models without consent or compensation.

Keep reading

These Are The Biggest Threats To Teens’ Mental Health

Concerns over teen mental health are growing, but how teens and parents view the root causes can differ significantly. This visualization, via Visual Capitalist’s Bruno Venditti, compares their perspectives on what’s driving mental health issues among adolescents.

Although both groups identify social media as the biggest concern, teens are more likely than parents to cite bullying and academic pressure. The chart highlights where their views align—and where they diverge.

Social Media Tops Both Lists

Social media is the #1 concern for both groups, though the degree of concern differs.

While 44% of parents name social media as the top threat, just 22% of teens do the same. In fact, a majority of teens see social media as a positive space for friendships and creativity: 74% of teens say these platforms make them feel more connected to their friends, and 63% say they give them a place to show off their creative side.

Keep reading

Cop ignored dying man in back of hot police car, watched TikToks and sent ‘intimate’ texts instead: lawsuit

An Oregon cop allegedly left a mentally ill man to die in the back of a hot police car while the officer watched TikToks and texted about “snuggles,” according to a lawsuit.

Nathan Bradford Smith, 33, died of heat stroke aggravated by meth use during a July 2024 arrest when Coos Bay police officers allegedly left him in a parked patrol car to watch TikToks and send intimate texts instead of getting him medical help, according to a lawsuit filed by Smith’s family Wednesday.

The lawsuit blasts the city of Coos Bay, and Officers Benjamin Martin, Tristan Smith, and Wesley O’Connor for ignoring signs of obvious medical distress in Smith, accusing them of negligence and “deliberate interference.”

Smith, who had schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, was picked up by cops after multiple police encounters where he was found smoking methamphetamine and later speaking “quickly and incomprehensibly,” according to the lawsuit obtained by The Post.

At roughly 5 p.m. July 7, officers found Smith wearing a heavy coat and rain pants on the ground outside a Motel 6, the lawsuit detailed.

“One of the 911 callers indicated they were concerned for Mr. Smith’s safety,” according to the lawsuit. “Another caller indicated that Mr. Smith was on the ground ‘flailing around,’” the lawsuit said.

Smith was struggling to breathe as he was handcuffed by Martin, Smith and O’Connor while still on the ground, according to a state police officer who reviewed the body camera video of the incident.

He was barely able to get in the police cruiser, and his eyes were closed as he gasped for air, the lawsuit said.

Keep reading

The U.S. Intervenes Against EU Digital Surveillance

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has launched a lobbying campaign against the EU’s Digital Services Act. With this step, Americans have become the last line of defense for the free speech rights of EU citizens.

If, in the past, President Donald Trump often spoke of the European Union as “a tough nut to crack,” he couldn’t have been more accurate. Freedom-loving EU citizens know exactly what he meant. In Brussels, a bizarre mélange of control fetishism, economic dirigisme, and isolation from the outside world has developed — a combination that is no longer tolerable.

Not least, Brussels’s fight against free expression in the digital sphere has revealed the true intentions of the von der Leyen Commission: the recovery of narrative dominance and control over political dissidence — achieved by cold-bloodedly sacrificing citizens’ fundamental freedoms.

U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance already issued multiple warnings in the spring about a European censorship empire. In a speech to the Senate, he denounced European digital legislation as an attack on western liberties. In his address at the Munich Security Conference, he went so far as to suggest cutting ties with the Europeans if they did not reverse their illiberal, dictatorial trajectory.

Criticism Bounces Off

As usual, American criticism fell on deaf ears in Brussels. Although Brussels swallowed the bitter pill of an asymmetrical trade deal with the U.S. two weeks ago, both the hidden protectionism disguised as climate regulation and harmonization standards, as well as the repressive digital laws, remain intact. This is detrimental not only to free speech among Europeans but also for American companies — undoubtedly a key target of the EU censors.

The EU’s discriminatory ambitions through the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the corresponding Digital Markets Act (DMA) primarily target U.S. communication platforms like X, Telegram, and Meta. If these platforms don’t conform to EU rules — granting access to internal communications and aiding Brussels’s surveillance efforts — they face billions in fines.

Much like Britain’s digital ID program, Brussels now masks its shamelessly invasive censorship with claims of youth protection and anti-hate measures. It’s tiresome to hear — but, as always, it’s about “their democracy,” or, to put it more accurately, a massive concrete barrier constructed to shield against the audacious citizen seeking to preserve privacy from an unbounded EU bureaucracy.

Keep reading

Canada’s prime minister tells Canadians to get their news from state-controlled media

In Canada, free speech is no longer a thing.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney utilized an August 5 press conference in British Columbia to dismiss concerns over Liberal legislation (Bill C-18) that would forbid news outlets from sharing news on social media, particularly during emergencies. The Canadian Commie globalist didn’t just refuse to rescind the aforementioned Bill C-18. No siree, he also urged his fellow Canucks to rely on government-funded CBC News for fair and unbiased information.

In light of the fact that heads of government steadfastly refuse to tell the truth, I have taken the liberty to translate Carney’s statement to more accurately reflect his actual meaning and beliefs. It would go: Comrades, trust me, the CBC is a reliable and highly credible news source that is as honest as our glorious revolution is long. And remember, unfettered free speech is the hallmark of a depraved and chaotic society, and invites input from those that don’t value the revolution above all.

This despite the fact that many objective observers deem the CBC to be a propaganda arm of the Liberal Party, from which it receives the vast majority of its funding, similar to the mainstream media’s relationship to the Democrat party in the United States.

But quashing free speech and association isn’t enough for the Carney government. Perish the thought! The ruling Liberal Party is also encouraging “LGBTQI+” refugees to move to Canada by offering them taxpayer-funded income for up to 12 months in addition to various other programs.

Turns out, the Babylon Bee’s allegedly satiric post referencing President Trump’s desire to annex Canada and label it “Gay North Dakota” was spot-on. (Corollary: it’s shocking how many “conspiracy theories” have turned out to be facts.)

So, once again, you have a Western nation trashing its own citizens and traditions in favor of foreigners, especially those with sexual kinks.

Keep reading

Court Says UW-Madison Social Media Censorship Illegal

The University of Wisconsin-Madison’s attempt to suppress an animal rights advocate’s comments on its social media pages has been declared unconstitutional by a federal appeals court, reinforcing the limits of government control over public discourse online.

Madeline Krasno, a UW-Madison graduate and former lab worker who spoke out against the school’s animal research practices, brought a lawsuit in 2021 after discovering that her posts were either blocked or hidden from the university’s Facebook and Instagram accounts.

The 7th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in her favor on August 1, concluding that the university violated her First Amendment rights by silencing her viewpoint.

We obtained a copy of the opinion for you here.

Now faced with the ruling, UW-Madison must decide whether to revise its moderation policies, disable comment functions on its social platforms, or try to escalate the case to the US Supreme Court. University officials have not indicated which direction they plan to take.

Krasno’s criticism comes from her time spent inside the university’s primate lab, where she worked as an undergraduate. She described disturbing conditions, saying she witnessed monkeys kept in isolation, sometimes escaping, and often displaying stress or aggression after being subjected to research. When she later tried to express these concerns publicly through university-run social media, her posts disappeared.

At one point, the university placed an account-level restriction on her Instagram profile, preventing any of her comments from being seen by the public. Even after that restriction was lifted, the school relied on automated filters that blocked posts containing words such as “lab,” “monkeys,” “torture,” “animal testing,” and “primate.”

Keep reading

“Chat Control” – EU Proposal To Scan All Private Messages Gains Momentum

A controversial European Union proposal dubbed “Chat Control” is regaining momentum, with 19 out of 27 EU member states reportedly backing the measure.

The plan would mandate that messaging platforms, including WhatsApp, Signal and Telegram, must scan every message, photo and video sent by users starting in October, even if end-to-end encryption is in place, popular French tech blogger Korben wrote on Monday.

Denmark reintroduced the proposal on July 1, the first day of its EU Council presidency. France, once opposed, is now in favor, Korben said, citing Patrick Breyer, a former member of the European Parliament for Germany and the European Pirate Party.

Belgium, Hungary, Sweden, Italy and Spain are also in favor, while Germany remains undecided. However, if Berlin joins the majority, a qualified council vote could push the plan through by mid-October, Korben said.

A qualified majority in the EU Council is achieved when two conditions are met. First, at least 55 percent of member states, meaning 15 out of 27, must vote in favor. Second, those countries must represent at least 65% of the EU’s total population.

Keep reading

Judge Strikes Down California Deepfake Censorship Law

California’s attempt to regulate political speech on major social media platforms has been blocked in federal court, with a judge ruling the state’s latest “deepfake” law clashes with protections already established by Congress.

Assembly Bill 2655 attempted to compel certain large platforms to track down and delete “materially deceptive content” about candidates, election officials, and officeholders.

Supporters described it as a safeguard against manipulated media. The companies targeted, including X and Rumble, argued it was an attempt to turn them into agents of government censorship.

Senior US District Judge John Mendez sided with the platforms and did not even need to reach the argument of constitutional free speech questions to strike down the measure.

He found the federal Communications Decency Act [CDA] already shields online services from punishment over third-party content.

“No parts of this statute are severable because the whole statute is preempted,” Mendez said in court. “No parts of A.B. 2655 can be salvaged.”

The ruling applies to the companies in the lawsuit, and his earlier order freezing enforcement of the law remains in effect statewide until he issues a formal opinion.

For Mendez, the law punished companies for doing something they are “clearly protected by [the CDA] from doing.”

The court also cast doubt on another state law, Assembly Bill 2839, which prohibits false or misleading digital communications aimed at election workers, officials, voting equipment, or candidates in the months leading up to an election. That measure is also on hold, and Mendez signaled he doubts it will survive judicial review.

“Anybody can sue,” he said. “I can sue. If I see the video, under this law, I can sue.” He warned that such a rule chills protected speech and noted the state had not shown it was using the least speech-restrictive approach possible.

Keep reading