Abusing media jeopardizes our precious and fragile democracies
Have you considered a blog, or maybe an RSS feed, rather than making half the posts on babble "Look at this link I just saw!"? It's gotten quite difficult to have actual discussions.
Excellent suggestion. What I really hate is when a few people start to discuss an issue in a bit of depth and he comes on and spams the thread that is being discussed with a half a dozen or more links. Anyone then looking at the thread only sees more of his constant stream of spam and they don't necessarily go back and look at the discussion.
To return to the subject of the thread (censorship), yesterday the Montreal Gazette published this rather horrifying bit of Orwellian spin, talking about how important it is to protect free speech by eliminating free speech. St-Victor also says the government needs to give more money to institutions pushing approved viewpoints as it cracks down on unapproved ones. Sadly, I don't expect the NDP to make a peep over this, as freedom of speech has now apparently been abandoned to the right wing.
Indeed, the elimination of free speech and thought crime in accordance with elite agendas is well underway. The abusing media are critical in this project and the Canadian media among the worst.
According to the BBC, researchers at Meta (formerly Facebook) have discovered that individuals connected to the U.S. military have been conducting online misinformation campaigns very similar to those the 5 Eyes are always accusing their rivals of perpetrating. The pentagon told BBC news that they are aware of the claims but have no further comment. LOL.
Just saw this.
this rather horrifying bit of Orwellian spin, talking about how important it is to protect free speech by eliminating free speech.To return to the subject of the thread (censorship), yesterday the Montreal Gazette published
I suppose some people might think it horrifying to be held to account for the things they write and say. I don't.
And it is kind of funny when you look at how high the bar really is for hate crime, and how rarely the laws are used in Canada.
Let's not confuse real violations of free speech with things like reasonable content moderation, and legal consequences for actions that harm others.
Was CBC's decision to get rid of their online comments horrifying, or an elimination of free speech? Personally I think they had little choice short of pre-screening every post, and it is telling that they started by ending comments on stories on Indigenous issues in response to unending racist attacks.
In case the concept isn't clear:
White accused Musk of “trying to help a fascist have a platform so you can eventually get your tax breaks,” saying he was “a believer in free speech” but wouldn’t “let the KKK hold a rally at our record label’s performance stage.”
“That’s one of the platforms we control and have a say in, it’s not town square operated by the government,” he explained.
“And if I owned a gas station, I wouldn’t be selling the KKK gasoline to burn crosses either and then wash my hands as if I didn’t help facilitate hatred.”
“You took on a big responsibility with your purchase, and ‘free speech’ isn’t some umbrella that protects you from that,” White warned.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/jack-white-elon-musk-donald-trump_n_637c8...
"It just happens to be one of the most surreal aspects of American political life that the political party that incessantly clamours it is the sole bulwark against 'fascism' has, as one of its central tactics, the union of state and corporate power to censor the citizenry."
I think Trump should be allowed on twitter, and it is an obvious free speech issue that he's not. Twitter is a defacto public town square, especially for journalists and media elites. Trump is a former president who is running for office again. There is an obvious public interest in what he says and does.
Very curious to see if Musk will actually release logs/internal emails on the Hunter Biden laptop story:
https://radaronline.com/p/elon-musk-full-disclosure-twitter-suppressed-h...
I don't expect to agree on this, but the notion that one of the most followed people in the world is having his free speech infringed is ridiculous. Especially when you consider his response was to start his own social media platform, which was followed and cited by media just like his racism and lies on twitter. He has never been silenced.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/apr/09/truth-social-trump-app-f...
And it isn't that different for others; the internet is a big place. As for the notion that social media platforms don't have the right to set their own terms of conduct and content, that is ridiculous.
Remember Free Dominion? They learned the limits of letting people lie and defame on their site (as did the National Post in one of the cases).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Dominion
Every media outlet has editorial policies and legal constraints. That is in no way a violation of free speech.
The biggest problem is the monopoly aspect of the media. Musk should just not be allowed to own this much of the globe's "media." The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 was in response to the Gilded Age's Robber Barons. Robber baron is not a bad name for the tech corp assholes as well.
The biggest problem is the monopoly aspect of the media. Musk should just not be allowed to own this much of the globe's "media." The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 was in response to the Gilded Age's Robber Barons. Robber baron is not a bad name for the tech corp assholes as well.
I agree with this, and I would add that if a platform such as twitter has become so important that it has in effect become a public square, and its moderating and editing policies need to consider the free speech rights of users, it should be nationalized and operated as a non-profit run by a board with some sort of public accountability.
Yes, that's the utopian ideal, but I don't see it happening in the short term. While we wait, I think we should expect that our for profit privately owned public squares make their content moderation policies as permissive as possible, with transparent criteria, appeal process, etc. And that they would allow strong disagreement on contentious issues, not tilt or favour certain content because the owners agree with it, etc.
A social media ecosystem that is all bubbles of like minded individuals leads to extremism and a general inability to tolerate or discuss issues where there is strong disagreement.
Mastadon's system of 'instances' where the owners of each instance can choose which other instance to allow communication to and from, for example, will enable this sort of environment. Although it seems Mastadon overall is too arcane and techy for general users anyhow, so not likely to be a real competitor to twitter.
It isn't an either/or.
Even before Musk fucking up twitter there were journalists moving their main page to Mastadon, Telegram (if your focus is the Russian-speaking world that is your main platform), and other sites. You can mirror your main post site to however many you want.
It really is more about fiefdoms. Some places are kijiji. Some are craigslist. Here in North America it is messenger, but in Europe it is WhatsApp.
And of course a lot of what platform you use depends on your age.
I am less concerned about monopoly (because it isn't really - not in the way Facebook is a de facto one) than it is about Musk's double standards (because he isn't a free speech absolutist at all if he cans people for making fun of him) and instability. And the fact that he has undermined the site's credibility by turning that blue check into something you can buy for eight bucks.
I do plan to check out Mastadon. Reddit also has some independent moderation, but a lot of their comment sections are a complete shitshow.
As an aside, it really is astonishing how bad a businessperson Musk has turned out to be. One example is that bullshit he pulled in Ukraine over Starlink. You don't do that in the middle of a war, and the U.S. government responded very quickly by pledging to set up their own system to do the same thing.
Some of you might not agree with all of this, but it is an informative perspective on this musk thing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNS3l8yvvrE
and this is quite interesting. I seriously recommend watching all 10 minutes of it, because it gets to the heart of this free speech fallacy:
Just on the Musk side of things, I agree he isn't a free speech proponent in any serious sense. He's been remarkably trollish and juvenile. Sort of makes one wonder what sort of personality it takes to become a billionaire these days.
I do like twitter, and I mainly use it to follow particular journalists / writers. I am hoping it survives him. But I will also be happy if he trainwrecks twitter and spills the dirty laundry out on the floor. I want to know how their algorithm worked, interested to see how many bots there actually were, how responsive twitter was to FBI requests, etc.
'Be it Resolved: Don't Trust Mainstream Media'
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/be-it-resolved-dont-trust-mainstream
"May opening remarks for the Munk Debates in Toronto tonight:
'My name is Matt Taibbi, I've been a reporter for 30 years, and I argue for the resolution. You should not trust mainstream media..."
The latest from Mr. Free Speech:
Musk said in response, “Just clarifying that his account is being suspended for incitement to violence, not an unflattering pic of me.”
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/12/2/musk-boots-kanye-west-off-twitt...
Contrary to certain circulating mythologies he is only too happy to foster, billionaire Musk is a player fully aware of and prepared to continue Twitter's ongoing suppression and silencing of dissident voices.
Aside from some performative theatrics such as offering Trump back his account and such like, the suppression and removal of genuinely leftist and progressive voices from Twitter continues apace so that lying orthodoxies of power and domination that both Musk and Smith support are maintained.
He's at it already:
https://www.theverge.com/2022/11/28/23481673/twitter-porn-spam-chinese-p...
While with the other hand...
https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2022/4/29/as-musk-eyes-twitter-china-a...
NDPP: "Contrary to certain circulating mythologies he is only too happy to foster, billionaire Musk is a player fully aware of and prepared to continue Twitter's ongoing suppression and silencing of dissident voices.
Aside from some performative theatrics such as offering Trump back his account and such like, the suppression and removal of genuinely leftist and progressive voices from Twitter continues apace..."
Yes, agree. I see this more as a result of security state pressure than any individual choice or preference of Musk's, as it's happened across most big social media platforms. Not meaning this as a defence of Musk -- more that it's structural -- if he wanted to allow more dissident leftist voices, he wouldn't be a billionaire, and twitter's advertisers would be running faster than they already are.
From Taibbi's opening remarks:
Whether it’s Fox, or MSNBC, or CNN, or the Washington Post, nearly all Western media outlets are in the demographic-hunting business. This may be less true in Canada, where there’s a stronger public media tradition, but in the U.S., it’s standard.
Call it the “audience-optimization” model: instead of starting with a story and following the facts, you start with what pleases your audience, and work backward to the story. In this system, the overwhelming majority of national media organizations cater to one “side” or the other. For instance, according to a Pew Center survey from a few years ago, 93% of Fox’s audience votes Republican, while in an exactly mirroring phenomenon, MSNBC’s audience is 95% Democratic.
Our colleagues on the other side tonight represent two once-great media organizations. Michelle, the Pew survey says the audience for your New York Times is now 91% comprised of Democrats. Malcolm, the last numbers I could find for the New Yorker were back in 2012, and even then, only 9% of the magazine’s readers were Republicans. I imagine that number is smaller now.
This bifurcated system is fundamentally untrustworthy. When you decide in advance to forego half of your potential audience, to fulfill the aim of catering to the other half, you’re choosing in advance which facts to emphasize and which to downplay. You’re also choosing which stories to cover, and which ones to avoid, based on considerations other than truth or newsworthiness."
But is it a case of the media chasing or manipulating an audience, or correlation? How many Conservative party members frequent Rabble? Does that make this site just cheap entertainment or manipulation?
To be honest, I found that Taibbi article pretty damned thin and naive for someone who is in the trade, and should know better (or maybe he is just a fucking clown). And yes, I am aware it is a business and that newspapers have slants, and the NYT is a very conservative machine. But it is way more complex than the way he paints it.
Also, no small alternative media outlet has the financing and time for long investigative work and freedom of information challenges, for example the piece two years ago on the Trump family's finances. Unfortunate, but that requires a big media machine.
That is part of the reason why I think they (like government and the courts) are important, despite their conservative nature. It is also part of the reason why they are a target for those who are nothing but wreckers.
https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/david-barstow-susanne-craig-and-russ-bu...
Anyone who doesn't think there are plenty of voices on twitter who support the Russian invasion, consider the Ukrainian government a pack of Nazis and oppose NATO is clearly not paying attention or deliberately ignoring it.
Yes there are some moderations and bans, but those cut across the spectrum.
"The whole sleazy, in-group liberal gang from NBC, Daily Beast, etc -- all the censorship advocates who think censorship advocacy is somehow compatible with journalism -- are furious that the actions of their Dem Party allies in getting the Biden [laptop] story censored are being exposed."
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1598852100548489217
Musk Provides Twitter Censorship File
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/12/musk-provides-twitter-censorship-f...
The librul media and the Democratic Party launched a censorship and denial campaign to suppress the news about the laptop. They called it 'Russian disinformation.' A court later verified that the content of the laptop was genuine. When the story broke Twitter prominently prohibited and suppressed all links to the New York Post story.
Elon Musk, who recently bought Twitter, has given the relevant internal Twitter communications to muckraker Matt Taibbi..."
Elon Musk, who recently bought Twitter, has given the relevant internal Twitter communications to muckraker Matt Taibbi..."
Quite the noble cause, NDPP.
James Woods ranting on Tucker Carlson for what he thinks is his constitutional right to post other people's dick pics (though he doesn't mention that is what he did). And I am sure the DNC tanked the career of a guy who hasn't won an award in 22 years.
It really is worth listening to the whole thing:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/james-woods-fires-back-twitter-vows-sue-ce...
Sounds like Glenn is going to be up next on this blockbuster. Friends gotta look out for each other.
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1598829957123227648
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfzlnNdRyD0
Meanwhile, in the real world:
https://www.wonkette.com/matt-taibbi-hunter-biden
https://www.thebulwark.com/no-you-do-not-have-a-constitutional-right-to-...
Banderite Smith loves America's support for proxy war in Ukraine. Zionist JKR loves America's support for Apartheid Israel. Both consider Dems best for both causes. Both believe censorship is necessary to keep both going. It is and it will. Musk or no Musk.
Banderite Smith.
I am not sure what you mean by this NDPP. Care to elaborate?
Banderite Smith loves America's support for proxy war in Ukraine. Zionist JKR loves America's support for Apartheid Israel. Both consider Dems best for both causes. Both believe censorship is necessary to keep both going. It is and it will. Musk or no Musk.
NDPP, why are you aiming anger, hatred, and disparaging mis-characterizations, against me and others here?
I don't hate anyone here. But you who have smeared me so many times I cannot count them on the fingers of my hands ask me this?
Because I have been reading your postings for enough years to conclude what should be obvious to all.
But you who have smeared me so many times I cannot count them on the fingers of my hands ask me this?
How many times have you smeared others here? I lost count many years ago. For instance, how many times have you singled out people here and spoken pejoratively about other posters using terms like “U.S. ass lickers” and just now “banderite”?
Because I have been reading your postings for enough years to conclude what should be obvious to all.
What should be obvious to all?
Because I have been reading your postings for enough years to conclude what should be obvious to all.
It isn't obvious to me. That is why I am asking you what you mean when you call me "Banderite Smith" because I don't understand. Can you explain please?
I think it is obvious to you. My opinion derives from your long posting history here supporting the US sponsored/ NATO-backed Banderite regime in Kiev and its joint project to weaponize Ukraine to attack Russia.
I think it is obvious to you. My opinion derives from your long posting history here supporting the US sponsored/ NATO-backed Banderite regime in Kiev and its joint project to weaponize Ukraine to attack Russia.
None of that makes any sense. If you accused me of being anti union at least it would have something to do with an actual policy of the Ukrainian government, but I am not that either. More importantly there's a big difference between supporting a nation's sovereignty and its government of the day.
I don't accuse you of supporting torture or terrorism or racism because of the causes you promote here because it would be as manipulative as you are being with this stupid trolling bullshit.
Kind of funny that you try and equate online moderation and standards with censorship and violation of free speech, and then in the next breath violate that principle by posting more of this bad faith crap.
"Julian Assange is a victim of torture and inhuman treatment. This is a threat not just to Assange himself but to freedom of speech everywhere in the world.' UN's Nils Melzer's book is the essential, utterly forensic analysis of this case."
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1599327648865554432
Assange's Extradition to US: Canada's Silence Speaks Volumes
https://cpcml.ca/Tmlm2022/Articles/M5201010.HTM
"This is political persecution pure and simple and the countries such as Canada which are complicit have no credibility whatsoever when they claim to defend human rights and freedom of the press in any country of the world including their own.
They aim to define a threat to national security in any way they wish to establish uncontested control over the entire world. It is necessary to speak out against the methods they are using to achieve this, including attempts to extradite Julian Assange."
Twitter has reinstated the account of Andrew Anglin, editor of the neo-Nazi website Daily Stormer. His account was suspended nearly a decade ago.
Some of his views:
"The goal is to ethnically cleanse White nations of non-Whites and establish an authoritarian government. Many people also believe that the Jews should be exterminated"
"Look, I hate women. I think they deserve to be beaten, raped and locked in cages."
"ICYMI: Jackson Hinkle banned from twitter hours after defending the Orthodox Church in Ukraine against NATO-proxy Zelensky's ban against Christians."
https://twitter.com/afshinrattansi/status/1599816978365288448
Aaron Mate on Twitter Tantrums (radio)
https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1599569440999604226
"After Matt Taibbi obtains internal emails detailing the censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop story, a meltdown ensues..."
Interview: Freedom Rider Margaret Kimberley (and vid)
https://twitter.com/georgegalloway/status/1599735282051715074
"...Reveals that Twitter is in lockstep with the US Democrats. And how Big Tech has become an arm of the party."
And some here apparently prefer it that way.
"...Reveals that Twitter is in lockstep with the US Democrats. And how Big Tech has become an arm of the party."
And some here apparently prefer it that way.
Another false smear of fellow posters?
"ICYMI: Jackson Hinkle banned from twitter hours after defending the Orthodox Church in Ukraine against NATO-proxy Zelensky's ban against Christians."
https://twitter.com/afshinrattansi/status/1599816978365288448
Was he canned BECAUSE of that post? Seems like he posts a lot of crap.
'On Tuesday, Twitter Deputy General Counsel (and former FBI General Counsel) Jim Baker was fired. Among the reasons? 'Vetting' the first batch of 'Twitter Files' without knowledge of new management.'
https://twitter.com/caitoz/status/1600275961441701888
"Probably worth noting here that Alan MacLeod has been documenting the alarming trend of massive online platforms hiring insiders from the US intelligence cartel for key positions of influence..."
Baker scrubs Twitter files of FBI/Hunter's laptop before Taibbi gets them. Focus on Trump follies while duopoly Dems own corrupt totalitarian tendencies become ever more obvious.
TJDS: Corporate Reporters United in Hate...
"Jimmy and his panel discuss the epic meltdown among corporatist reporters over Taibbi's big scoop."
“Taibbi's big scoop."
LOL
AKA “Taibbi’s nothingburger.”
Taibbi revealed that Twitter did not want to publish stolen dick pics and revenge porn.
Taibbi:
"Although several sources recalled hearing about a “general” warning from federal law enforcement that summer about possible foreign hacks, there’s no evidence - that I've seen - of any government involvement in the laptop story. "
https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598833927405215744
Actually I really like the "FIRST AMENDMENT ISN'T ABSOLUTE" in all caps, like he just learned Santa Claus isn't real.
I have asked this before, but is he really that dumb, or is he just counting on his readers being that gullible?
Taibbi:
"Although several sources recalled hearing about a “general” warning from federal law enforcement that summer about possible foreign hacks, there’s no evidence - that I've seen - of any government involvement in the laptop story. "
https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598833927405215744
Actually I really like the "FIRST AMENDMENT ISN'T ABSOLUTE" in all caps, like he just learned Santa Claus isn't real.
I have asked this before, but is he really that dumb, or is he just counting on his readers being that gullible?
I think Taibbi (like Glenn Greenwald) realized in the past few years that there is much more money and fame to be reaped as a right wing commentator than a left one. This is even more so when you pretend that you are still "liberal" while you denounce "the left" for their evil ways. So no, imho he isn't that dumb, he just knows where his personal best interests lie.
@ Michael Moriarity
I agree too. For me that leads to option B. I think they do know what they are doing, and counting on people to not connect the dots.