Tag: twitter

The DOT’s Twitter Meme Doesn’t Just Offend Comedy… It May Also Be Illegal

It’s a well-known fact that liberalism and comedy aren’t a good mix. Witness Hannah Gadsby. Or most of Saturday Night Live‘s recent output. Or any of the current crop of late-night show hosts.

The same goes for the various departments of the Biden administration. Case in point: this doozy of a meme that the Department of Transportation recently tweeted.

If you don’t get it, it’s okay. There’s nothing to get other than the leftist talking point.

I’m not sure what we’re supposed to call the diametric opposite of comedy gold, but this is it. This meme is an affront to comedy. It’s neither cute nor funny, and it’s certainly not clever. There’s no original thought to it whatsoever, and the only thing revelatory about it is how slavishly devoted the left always is to The Narrative™.

In other words, this in no way resembles comedy.

Whoever developed this meme and posted it on the Department of Transportation’s Twitter account should have his or her password privileges revoked. I almost picture Pete Buttigieg himself sitting in front of his copy of Photoshop smiling smugly and saying to himself, “All my friends are gonna love this!”

As my PJ Media colleague Stacey Lennox so wisely put it, “The left can’t meme. We all know this.”

And don’t get me started on the ridiculous claim that the infrastructure bill and Build Back Better will combine like the Wonder Twins to “create millions of new jobs.” (Besides, one of the Wonder Twins always turned into a bucket of water, which definitely won’t help.)

No government program has lived up to that promise — other than maybe some New Deal stuff — so why would we expect these two legislative winners to do the same?

But it gets better. Or worse, if you’re part of the Biden administration’s DOT.

Some people are accusing the DOT of improperly lobbying with a lame Twitter post. The Twittersphere and others are concerned that the meme may violate the Hatch Act.

Keep reading

Twitter’s new CEO Parag Agrawal previously rejected free speech in favor of “healthy public conversation”

In a far-reaching November 2020 interview, Twitter’s new CEO Parag Agrawal, who was the company’s Chief Technology Officer (CTO) at the time, rejected free speech protections that are enshrined in the First Amendment of the US Constitution, wished the company had censored QAnon sooner, and touted the company’s approach of censoring content based on “potential for harm.”

“Our role is not to be bound by the First Amendment, but our role is to serve a healthy public conversation and our moves are reflective of things that we believe lead to a healthier public conversation,” Agrawal said in response to a question about protecting free speech as a core value and the role of the First Amendment.

He added that the company now focuses “less on thinking about free speech, but thinking about how the times have changed.” In this context, Agrawal said the role of Twitter is increasingly moving toward recommendations and “how we direct people’s attention is leading to a healthy public conversation that is most participatory.”

Keep reading

Facebook and Twitter Silent on Whether Kyle Rittenhouse Support Is Still Banned

Facebook and Twitter banned support for Kyle Rittenhouse across their platforms shortly after the Kenosha riots. After a jury in Wisconsin found Rittenhouse not guilty on all charges brought against him, those same platforms refuse to say if support for the teenager is still banned.

Rittenhouse was found not guilty on five charges including first-degree reckless homicide, two counts of first-degree intentional homicide and two counts of first-degree reckless endangerment. The presiding judge, Bruce Schroeder, also dismissed two additional weapons charges.

As Breitbart News recently reported, Big Tech companies continued to censor statements of support for Rittenhouse, even as the prosecution’s case fell apart:

Over a year old, the ban is still in place on both Facebook and Instagram and is even catching GOP Senate candidates like Josh Mandel in its net.

Facebook says supporting Rittenhouse violates its guidelines on “violence or dangerous organizations.”

Users on Twitter also report that the platform is still suspending them for supporting Rittenhouse.

Keep reading

Twitter disables retweet function on Rittenhouse mother’s tweet condemning Big Tech censorship of her son

Kyle Rittenhouse, who is currently facing trial for shooting three men, killing two of them, on the night of Aug. 25, 2020, was branded as a “white supremacist” from the beginning by left-wing politicians and personalities.

His trial has done much to back the claims of self-defense that his defense attorneys are arguing, yet Twitter has disabled the retweet function on a tweet by Rittenhouse’s mother stating that media had lied about her son and condeming Big Tech’s attempts to “crush & deplatform” the young defendant.

“The media & many who know better viciously lied about my son from he start. Tech companies tried to crush & deplatform @freekyleusa over 20x, often w/o explanation,” wrote Wendy Rittenhouse.

“We are facing tremendous expenses to help Kyle win this case & could use your help,” she continued, linking to a donation page.

Keep reading

Twitter backtracks after censoring a mother’s obituary

Twitter’s fact-checkers appended a “misleading” alert to an obituary about a young woman who allegedly died after contracting a rare blood-clotting condition provoked by the COVID-19 vaccine.

After being accused of going so far with its censorship that it would resort to censoring an obituary, Twitter relented to the backlash and reversed the censorship.

The woman in question, Jessica Berg Wilson, a 37-year-old mother of two, died in the first week of September from Vaccine-Induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia, a rare blood disorder in which small clots grow throughout the body, damaging platelets and preventing blood from reaching key organs. According to her obituary, Wilson’s greatest life ambition was to “be the best mother possible” to her daughters Bridget and Clara.

“She had been vehemently opposed to taking the vaccine, knowing she was in good health and of a young age and thus not at risk for serious illness. In her mind, the known and unknown risks of the unproven vaccine were more of a threat,” it read.

Kelly Bee, a Twitter user, posted Jessica Berg Wilson’s obituary with the statement, “an ‘exceptionally healthy and vibrant 37-year-old young mother with no underlying health conditions,’ passed away from COVID Vaccine-Induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia. She did not want to get vaccinated.”

Keep reading

Twitter Fact Checkers Just Revealed Their Whole Entire Backside as Shameless Shills For Big Pharma

Fact checkers at Twitter and elsewhere furiously took to their keyboards yesterday in defense of America’s Big Pharma Covid profiteers. This time, the fact checkers circled the wagons around Pfizer, which is developing an expensive drug that serves a suspiciously similar function to the cheap, time-tested, generic drug ivermectin. This time, Twitter’s approved fact checkers trafficked in deception, misinformation, and carefully worded lies, as they so often do, in order to “debunk” an article from ZeroHedge.

Let’s dissect their work.

Here is what Twitter highlighted at the top of their “fact check”:

Pfizer is not developing a version of ivermectin to treat COVID-19, according to fact-checkers and medical professionals

A new oral drug being produced by Pfizer is not a repackaged version of the antibacterial medication often used to prevent parasites in animals, according to PolitiFact, Snopes and Full Fact. While the drugs share similar functions and effects, this does not mean they are identical or interchangeable, according to fact-checkers. Pfizer’s new oral drug “is not similar to that of an animal medicine and is not the same mechanism,” according to a statement from the company.

Further on down the page, Twitter deigned to tell us “What We Need to Know.” Thanks, Twitter!

What you need to know

– Pfizer told Snopes that the new drug is “designed to block the activity of the main protease enzyme that the coronavirus needs to replicate”

– Dr. Stephen Griffin, a virologist at Leeds Institute of Medical Research, told Full Fact that the two drugs “are extremely structurally different”

– Health agencies around the globe have declined to authorize ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19, and studies on its potential use have been inconclusive, according to FactCheck.org

Here’s more from the Twitter-approved fact checkers, who we can obviously trust so much. They are overly fixated on the fact that  ivermectin and the new Pfizer drug do not share the same chemical structures.

So, Twitter and our highly trusted “Fact Checkers” tell us that the two drugs are totally different, because they have a different chemical structure, which makes the Zero Hedge totally false, right? An open and shut case?

Keep reading

German man raided by police after calling politician a “dick” on Twitter

Six police officers in Hamburg, Germany, raided the house of a man who insulted a politician on Twitter using a phrase that refers to the male genitalia. The raid was heavily blasted on social media as classic overreach by German authorities.

A little over three months ago, a Twitter user who goes by the screen name “ZooStPauli,” described Hamburg’s interior and sports minister Andy Grote as “pimmel,” (a “dick”) in a reply to a post by the minister. On early Wednesday morning, six officers raided his house to search for evidence.

“My house was searched at 6:00 this morning. Six officers in the apartment,” ZooStPauli tweeted on Wednesday. “They know there are two young children living in this household. Good morning Germany.”

Keep reading

Twitter, Facebook, President Biden, and Surgeon General sued for alleged censorship collusion

US data analyst Justin Hart is one of the recent victims of COVID-related censorship on social networks, but he’s also one of those joining to fight back in the legal arena.

The Liberty Justice Center, a non-profit focused on constitutional rights, is suing on his behalf, with Facebook, Twitter, US President Joe Biden and the Surgeon General Vivek Murthy all named as defendants.

We obtained a copy of the complaint for you here.

Hart is alleging that his First Amendment free speech rights had been violated when his social media accounts got suspended for posting what is said to be a scientifically-based graphic under the title, “Masking Children is Impractical and Not Backed by Research or Real World Data.”

News outlets like the New York Post – who recall that their own factually correct, and occasionally bombshell stories (like the “Hunter Biden files“) got suppressed by Big Tech – suggest this claim should by now not be particularly contentious, let alone a reason for censorship.

“Study after study repeatedly shows that children are safer than vaccinated adults and that the masks people actually wear don’t do much good,” writes the Post.

But when Hart posted the infographic, Facebook reacted by locking his personal account, created in 2007, for three days. The filing indicates that the same happened to this data analyst and digital strategist on Twitter as well – but what’s particularly interesting is why top government officials, including the president himself, have been named in the lawsuit.

Namely, Hart alleges collusion between these privately owned giants and the US government, with the purpose of monitoring, flagging, suspending and deleting content that it chooses to label as misinformation.

Under current rules in the US dictated by its Constitution, the government would not be able to do this directly; but recent statements coming from Biden and some of his top collaborators have added fuel to the fire of suspicion that a form of collusion to suppress free expression on the internet might actually be taking place.

Biden recently went as far – to then be forced to walk back – as to publicly accuse Facebook of “killing people” by not getting rid of COVID content unwanted by the current administration fast enough.

This happened just after White House press secretary Jen Psaki said, “We are regularly making sure social media platforms are aware of the latest narratives dangerous to public health that we and many other Americans are seeing across all of social and traditional media,” adding, “You shouldn’t be banned from one platform and not others.”

Keep reading

Twitter’s ‘Safety Mode’ is just a new way to silence opponents to the tech giant’s woke social justice agenda

Ever keen to be seen doing more about online abuse among its users, Twitter has decided to nobble free speech with a novelty ‘Safety Mode’ button, which might reduce offence. Exactly what ‘offence’ means is up to the tech giant.

Something about Twitter has long irritated me, not so much the platform itself but the smug self-righteousness of a bunch of tech nerds adopting the moral high ground over the inalienable right to free speech.

I’m not just talking about Jack Dorsey and his Silicon Valley sidekicks who blocked Donald Trump’s social media account, but about their woke-fevered, sanctimonious, purse-lipped wowserish approach in imposing their own values in judging what should and shouldn’t be allowed to be said within their software apps.

Now, using the pretext of “Safety” –I mean, gimme a break– Twitter has announced a new “Safety Mode” which will automatically block, for seven days, “accounts that add unwanted replies, Quote Tweets and mentions to your convos.” Seven days. Smiley face with tears emoji.

Firstly, if unwanted replies or mentions on Twitter are the sort of thing that spoil your day, then might I suggest, my little snowflake friend, that social media is not the place for you. And if you believe that your life will be enhanced because you chose to switch on “Safety Mode,” then more fool you for signing up to the latest tech that implicitly denies the right to free speech.

Because Twitter has turned taking offence into a maths problem. No one is actually reading your tweets or replies to figure out if offence was caused – intentionally or otherwise – no, as a senior product manager explained, “When the feature is turned on in your Settings, our systems will assess the likelihood of a negative engagement by considering both the Tweet’s content and the relationship between the Tweet author and replier.”

Our systems, hey? What sort of systems are they? And what sort of data will they be trawling through, analysing, keeping and using in the future? Just one click on a little green button on your phone can forever change your relationship with Twitter and the way they target you with their insidious promotions. Think about that.

That fatal click could also blow a real human-to-human relationship out of the water. Twitter’s bot decides you’ve been slighted and the offender it identifies is sin-binned for seven days. While you can unblock, it’s too late, the damage is done. They were deemed ‘abusive’ before Twitter came to the rescue and they were silenced. Now you have to pick up the pieces.

It sounds petty, but it’s the prim, disapproving nanny looking over your shoulder that gets my goat. No one voted for anyone at Twitter to monitor the public discourse on social justice and that’s exactly where you know they’ll be targeting their bots. Discussions on race, gender and even climate change will most likely be judged on Twitter’s terms, the conversation manipulated by an algorithm so that those voices taking the most offence prevail in the debate and those that dissent are simply labelled ‘abusive’ and silenced.

Keep reading

Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Berenson After Viral COVID Tweets

It was never a matter of if, but when.

Science journalist Alex Berenson has been permanently suspended from Twitter, just one day after a viral series of tweets spotlighting an Israeli preprint study which showed that natural immunity from a prior Covid-19 infection is 13 times more effective than vaccines against the delta variant.

“The account you referenced has been permanently suspended for repeated violations of our COVID-19 misinformation rules,” a Twitter spokesperson told Fox News.

The last tweet he posted, meanwhile, accurately noted that the vaccine “doesn’t stop infection. Or transmission.”

“Don’t think of it as a vaccine,” he added. “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.”

“And we want to mandate it? Insanity.”

“This was the tweet that did it. Entirely accurate. I can’t wait to hear what a jury will make of this,” wrote Berenson on his substack blog, Unreported Truths.

Keep reading