How Google & Facebook Censor Content & Demonetize Independent Media

WND, (formerly WorldNetDaily)
Google-Facebook vs. America
http://www.wnd.com/2018/06/google-facebook-vs-america/
Joseph Farah asks, 'Where is President Trump on this critically important issue?'
Published: 1 day ago
Remember the days when the U.S. federal government concerned itself with media cross-ownership regulations?

Those were the rules that ensured media companies would not dominate individual geographic markets by buying up newspapers, radio stations and television properties in major cities.

The thought was that companies doing that would:

1. limit certain kinds of political speech;

2. and create advertising monopolies.

Today, newspapers, radio stations and television properties are more concerned with basic survival. Few big media companies are even interested in the benefits of dominating individual markets. As the most important and vital forms of media are now online, it’s almost as though the principles that seemed so important a few years ago – competition and free and open debate – have become irrelevant to government.

Two companies have become so dominant in media nationally and internationally that geographic dominance doesn’t seem so important anymore.

Those two companies are Google and Facebook. With hardly anyone in government noticing, these two digital media behemoths, sharing an ultra-left worldview, dominate both advertising revenues and control of the distribution of content in America and throughout the Western world. Add Amazon to the mix and the deck is so stacked against independent media voices and freedom of speech that the First Amendment could soon become a meaningless, irrelevant relic. Together, the three companies, are without question the most important media companies in the world – even though they aren’t known for creating content.

The worldview of Google, Facebook and Amazon (and you can throw in Twitter, if you like) is not unlike the worldview of San Francisco or Berkeley. It’s akin to the worldview that imposes speech codes on college and university campuses. It sees “conservative” ideas as “hate speech.” All of them employ as content police a corrupt, extremist, left-wing organization known as the Southern Poverty Law Center, which labels President Trump as a “fascist,” a “hater,” a “racist” and worse.

Think of how Google and Facebook alone impose their shared values on America today:
  • together they control digital advertising – depriving media who don’t follow their speech codes or play by the rules of their mysteriously and secretly changing algorithms from getting any;
  • through dominant search engine power, they effectively “bury” content they don’t like, while elevating their favored content creators;
  • they shut down YouTube and Facebook pages for content that offends their own narrow form of left-wing “political correctness”;
  • through their own political biases, they determine what is “real news” and what is “fake news”;
  • they own the platforms those with different views are forced to use – as bandwidth providers, as advertising servers;
Their ascendancy has narrowed debate and given preference to one political point of view in a way unprecedented in American history.

Government, meanwhile, the only power large enough to hold them in check, to demand accountability, to protect free speech, to uphold freedom of religion and to be a guardian of freedom of the press, has virtually ignored the crisis created by the power and wealth these public corporations have accumulated.

Censorship has won the day.

It’s not that a few politicians haven’t noticed what I am saying; it’s just that nothing is being done about it.

“These activists want the playing field to be tilted in favor of their ‘politically correct’ worldview so that democratic outcomes like the 2016 presidential election can never happen again,” warned Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. “Censorship like this undermines public discourse and trust in our institutions — and it is likely to get worse before it gets better.”

In the meantime, the independent media – companies like WND, Breitbart and others – are being targeted for extermination by this cartel. A cultural and corporate coup is under way. It may be the biggest threat we face to maintaining free and open debate in a civil society under the rule of the Constitution and the will of the people.

Where are the meaningful congressional hearings? Indeed, where is President Trump on this critically important issue?

We are in the midst of an important midterm election campaign that could shift the balance of political power. It could be the last meaningful election America ever has.

The hour is late.
The stakes are high.
The window of opportunity is closing.
 
There might be a way around the fb censorship. I've noticed that if I'm a member of a 'group' as opposed to being a 'friend' or 'liking/following' a page, I get every post from that group in my newsfeed.

So the upside is, everyone in the group gets the post, downside is, how to get people to join the group rather than just friending/liking. It might be a way to figure out who is actually reading your posts in the absence of likes and shares...those that aren't interested won't join the group, those that do might. Just a thought.
 
In the week of America’s Independence Day, the algorithms of Facebook decided that the Declaration of Independence was hate speech.

July 4, 2018 - Facebook Flags Declaration of Independence as Hate Speech
Facebook flags Declaration of Independence as hate speech

The Liberty County Vindicator, a community newspaper between Houston and Beaumont, had been posting the whole declaration in small daily chunks for nine days on its Facebook page in the run-up to July 4. But the 10th excerpt was not posted Monday as scheduled, and the paper said it received an automated notice saying the post “goes against our standards on hate speech.”

Part of the standard notice, Vindicator managing editor Casey Stinnett wrote, included a warning that the newspaper could lose its Facebook account, on which it depends for much of its reach, if there were more violations.

The offending passage?

It was part of the document’s “Bill of Particulars” against Britain’s King George III: “He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.”

Mr. Stinnett dryly replied in an article about the rejection, “Perhaps had Thomas Jefferson written it as ‘Native Americans at a challenging stage of cultural development’ that would have been better. Unfortunately, Jefferson, like most British colonists of his day, did not hold an entirely friendly view of Native Americans.”

He noted that the newspaper wanted “a means of contacting Facebook for an explanation or a opportunity to appeal the post’s removal, but it does not appear the folks at Facebook want anyone contacting them. Or, at least, they do not make it easy.”

Within a day, Facebook had paid heed, allowing the posting and sending the Vindicator an apology.

“It looks like we made a mistake and removed something you posted on Facebook that didn’t go against our Community Standards. We want to apologize and let you know that we’ve restored your content and removed any blocks on your account related to this incorrect action,” Facebook wrote back, the Vindicator reported.

Reason magazine pointed out how Facebook’s actions were “silly” but also the inevitable logic of massive social-media sites trying to police millions of messages, a task that cannot be done by humans.

“They demonstrate a problem with automated enforcement of hate speech policies, which is that a robot trained to spot politically incorrect language isn’t smart enough to detect when that language is part of a historically significant document,” wrote Christian Britschgi, an assistant editor at the libertarian magazine.

Mr. Britschgi went on to note a perverse result of allowing the Vindicator’s first nine excerpts from the Declaration but not the tenth, exactly because of what he called “clearly racist” language.

The phrasing “serves as another example of the American Revolution’s mixed legacy; one that won crucial liberties for a certain segment of the population, while continuing to deny those same liberties to Native Americans and African slaves. But by allowing the less controversial parts of the declaration to be shared while deleting the reference to ‘Indian savages,’ Facebook succeeds only in whitewashing America’s founding just as we get ready to celebrate it,” he wrote.
 
06.07.2018 - Facebook Plans to Launch $10Mln Reality Show Starring Football Superstar Ronaldo
Facebook Plans to Launch $10Mln Reality Show Starring Football Superstar Ronaldo

Facebook has already financed several original shows for the Watch streaming platform over the past year, but the new project may be the biggest original series deal to date, according to reports.

A 13-episode reality show about football superstar Cristiano Ronaldo is in the discussion stage, Variety has reported.

Mark Zuckerberg's corporation is ready to pay $10 million for the most famous athlete on the Facebook social network. Ronaldo has more than 120 million subscribers.

Facebook has also bought a drama series from Ronaldo and Paul Lee's Wiip Studio about a high-school girls football team in upstate New York.

The Portuguese national team, led by Ronaldo, exited the current World Cup in Russia, after being defeated by Uruguay on June 30.

Cristiano Ronaldo has played for Real Madrid since 2009, yet it looks like the star player is going to leave the club this summer, as, according to the reports, the Spanish club has agreed to Juventus FC's offer of $116 million for Ronaldo.

While playing for the Spanish giants he twice won the La Liga title, the Cup and the Spanish Super Cup.

With Real Madrid he won the Champions League four times, the UEFA Super Cup twice and the FIFA Club World Cup once.

In the past season for Real Madrid, Ronaldo played in 44 games, scored 44 goals and eight assists.
 
Twitter is sweeping out fake accounts like never before, putting user growth at risk
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/07/06/twitter-is-sweeping-out-fake-accounts-like-never-before-putting-user-growth-risk/?utm_term=.fda842d26843 July 6 at 6:30 PM
Twitter suspended more than 70 million accounts in May and June, and the pace has continued in July
:pinocchio:
SAN FRANCISCO – Twitter has sharply escalated its battle against fake and suspicious accounts, suspending more than 1 million a day in recent months, a major shift to lessen the flow of disinformation on the platform, according to data obtained by The Washington Post.


“One of the biggest shifts is in how we think about balancing free expression versus the potential for free expression to chill someone else’s speech,” Harvey said. “Free expression doesn’t really mean much if people don’t feel safe.”

“I wish Twitter had been more proactive sooner,” said Sen. Mark R. Warner (Va.), the top ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee. “I’m glad that – after months of focus on this issue – Twitter appears to be cracking down on the use of bots and other fake accounts, though there is still much work to do.”

Russian operatives used Twitter and Facebook to target veterans and military personnel, study says

The decision to forcefully target suspicious accounts followed a pitched battle within Twitter last year over whether to implement new detection tools. One previously undisclosed effort called “Operation Megaphone” involved quietly buying fake accounts and seeking to detect connections among them, said two people familiar with internal deliberations. They spoke on the condition of anonymity to share details of private conversations.

The name of the operation referred to the virtual megaphones – such as fake accounts and automation – that abusers of Twitter’s platforms use to drown out other voices. The program, also known as a white hat operation, was part of a broader plan to get the company to treat disinformation campaigns by governments differently than it did more traditional problems such as spam, which is aimed at tricking individual users as opposed to shaping the political climate in an entire country, according to these people. Harvey said she had not heard of the operation.
 
Last edited:
April 12, 2018 - Coincidence? On February 4, 2004, The Pentagon killed a project to amass personal browsing and viewing habits of American citizens. On the same date, Facebook launched. (Pictured graph)
Coincidence? On February 4, 2004, The Pentagon killed a project to amass personal browsing and viewing habits of American citizens. On the same date, Facebook launched. – Investment Watch Blog
http://www.investmentwatchblog.com/...-citizens-on-the-same-date-facebook-launched/
The Weird DARPA/Facebook "Coincidence" You Never Heard About
corbettreport Published on Jul 5, 2018 / 7:56
SHOW NOTES: https://www.corbettreport.com/?p=27329 Ever hear about "Lifelog?" You know, the DARPA project to create an automatically updated, itemized, organized, electronic list of every interaction you have, every event you attend, every place you go and everything you do? The project that was announced as canceled the very same day Facebook launched? Well, neither had I? In today's Thought for the Day we explore the Lifelog/Facebook "coincidence" and what it tells us about our wired world
 
Israel: The "High-Tech Superpower"
via @YouTube
Published on Jul 28, 2018
Comment from the author
Know More News 2 days ago
This article came out right after I finished putting this compilation together... "“The biggest challenge we face with the cyber world is protecting the privacy and security of the public. There could be a serious breach,” he said. “There should be a sort of UN for the internet. A coalition of the leading companies in the cyber world…and in my opinion Israel is the most advanced,” he [Netanyahu] added." https://www.rt.com/news/israel-netanyahu-un-internet-260/




 
Executives from multiple social media companies including Twitter and Facebook will testify at a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on September 5 about their efforts to address foreign influence, the committee's Chairman US Senator Mark Warner said on Wednesday.

01.08.2018 - Social Media Companies to Testify in US Senate Hearing on Sept. 5 - Senator
Social Media Companies to Testify in US Senate Hearing on Sept. 5 - Senator

"We will be hosting senior executives from Facebook, Twitter and, yes, Google at a hearing on Sept. 5. To hear the plans they have in place, to press them to do more, and to work together to address this challenge. That’s because it’s only going to get harder," Warner said in his opening remarks at a committee hearing.

The announcement comes after Facebook said on Tuesday that it found and removed 32 pages and accounts linked to ongoing attempts to influence US political discourse ahead of the 2018 midterm elections. The company said it was still investigating the "bad actors" behind the alleged campaign.

Facebook came under fire for allowing the placement of political campaign ads allegedly linked to Russian entities during the 2016 election.

Moscow has repeatedly rejected all allegations of election meddling, characterizing them as attempts by US politicians and media to fuel Russophobic hysteria without presenting any real evidence.


01.08.2018 - The Kremlin Line? Facebook's Latest Ban Nets Resistance Pages, Anti-Trump Events
The Kremlin Line? Facebook’s Latest Ban Nets Resistance Pages, Anti-Trump Events

Facebook removed 32 pages and accounts from its platforms Tuesday, including Instagram, for engaging in “coordinated inauthentic behavior.”

While the accounts and pages remain unattributed, Facebook, lawmakers and much of the US media are pointing their fingers in the direction of Russia — though a browse through Facebook's actual blog post on the ban offers little support for that.

But if the mainstream media is to be believed, the supposedly Kremlin-run troll farm, the Internet Research Agency is determined to keep on shitposting despite the February indictment of 13 of its alleged operatives.

Facebook can't or won't say who's behind the latest round of banned pages, although lawmakers say they can. "It's clear that whoever set up these accounts went to much greater lengths to obscure their true identities than the Russian-based Internet Research Agency," the company said in a blog post. "We face determined, well-funded adversaries who will never give up and are constantly changing tactics."

"[We] don't have all the facts," the company said.

Facebook identified four of the pages they banned on Tuesday: Resisters, Aztlan Warriors, Black Elevation and Mindful Being. "The remaining Pages had between zero and 10 followers, and the Instagram accounts had zero followers," the company said. In total, the company claims some $11,000 was spent on promoting ads from the 32 pages.

It's yet another strike from Facebook's banhammer after the company set off a series of removals supposedly related to Russia: First, the company found 470 alleged fake Russian accounts, it said in September 2017; then, on April 3, Facebook banned 70 Facebook accounts, 65 Instagram accounts and 138 Facebook pages allegedly controlled by the Internet Research Agency.

However, the company noted, there isn't actually much evidence that the "resistance" type page is linked to that movement's favorite foe, the Kremlin. "While IP addresses are easy to spoof, the IRA accounts we disabled last year sometimes used Russian IP addresses," the company said. "We haven't seen those here."

However, "one of the IRA accounts we disabled in 2017 shared a Facebook Event hosted by the ‘Resisters' Page. This Page also previously had an IRA account as one of its admins for only seven minutes," said the social media giant.

The company argues that because of its heightened enforcement efforts, trolls must be especially sneaky to slip through, and as such, Facebook needs "to find every small mistake they make."

In most cases, the public has only been made privy to small amounts of information on the activities those now-deleted accounts were engaging in, such as: posting memes of Hillary Clinton in a devil suit engaged in fisticuffs with Jesus of Nazareth, promoting coloring books featuring a muscular Bernie Sanders and creating fake protest pages.

The latest round of banings isn't much different and only reinforces the fact that none of the targeted accounts so far can be said to be spouting a Kremlin line, as there's no coherent ideology to be found. (Article continues.0


30.07.2018 - AT&T Hawking Private Data Network to Local Cops, Federal Police
AT&T Hawking Private Data Network to Local Cops, Federal Police

AT&T is rolling out what it calls an internet “super highway” to enable fast and private communication among local, state and federal law enforcement agencies, and raising some concerns about the reliance of law enforcement bodies on new technology as well as the closed-door nature of their private network.

Seventeen years after the terrorist attack against the World Trade Center in New York City, concerns about maintaining communication channels during emergencies continue to influence public and private policy — and concerns about giving cops hair-trigger access to personal data while protecting them from scrutiny continue to be voiced by rights groups.

In the latest bid to ensure smooth, swift communication for US law enforcement, AT&T is launching an internet "super highway." Think of it like a High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane, but for cops. The program, called FirstNet (First Responder Network), gives law enforcement "their own separate, nationwide broadband network.

Verizon is also constructing its own similar super highway network.

The idea of law enforcement agencies using one unified encrypted service is raising some alarms. One fear is that it will discourage law enforcement from using public radio frequencies, which are monitored by journalists, newsrooms, private citizens and activists during protests. FirstNet refused to offer comment to The Intercept as to whether they plan on offering local newsrooms any access to the network. Scott Edson, executive director of the Los Angeles Regional Interoperable Communication System, indicated such access will probably be decided at the level of local government.

Every US state has opted into the program, meaning, in other words, they have agreed not to build any competing broadband lanes. So far, more than 1,000 law enforcement agencies across the US have signed up as AT&T continues to hawk the service at more than 5,300 retail stores, even offering it to police and other first responders who don't get wireless plans through their departments — volunteers included.

AT&T pitches FirstNet as being able to "connect to critical databases to identify whether detained persons have been previously apprehended for violating immigration law by quickly and efficiently collecting biographic (e.g., name, date of birth, place of birth) and biometric information (e.g., 10-print fingerprints, photo image), which are submitted remotely to said databases," the Intercept notes.

It's also being touted for its ability to livestream data and video from surveillance drones and officers' body-worn cameras to police central command centers.

Used in conjunction with a program like Amazon's Rekognition, a facial recognition program capable of analyzing up to 100 faces in a single still image of real-time video, one can begin to picture the power such a rate of data-transfer could hold. As the ACLU reaffirmed earlier in July, the accuracy of facial recognition technology, such as Rekognition, is often dubious and racially biased.

Meanwhile, FirstNet has its own app store, and plans to offer through it applications that utilize facial recognition, real-time video and more.

The idea behind FirstNet was concocted after the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001. The 9/11 Commission report, published a few years later in July 2004, found that the use of separate radio frequencies by firefighters and police led to loss of life in critical moments when real-time communication is key. Another issue is that during emergencies, broadband networks get cluttered and slow as everyone hunts for information or tries to communicate. Law enforcement personnel on the same networks will face the same speed issues as everyone else, although they've been able to override public networks in the past.

That's where FirstNet comes in. It gives law enforcement both "priority" and "preemption" in broadband connectivity. Priority is like the HOV lane — fast access to the services they're after. Preemption would be used in the event network traffic is backed up across the board, as in during emergencies or worldwide events like the World Cup, by shutting down some public lanes and re-allocating them to law enforcement.

Since 9/11, the US government has sought to improve public safety communications and national security infrastructure, leading to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and its network of 79 fusion centers across the US; the spread of Joint Terrorism Task Forces, which create a nexus of local, state and federal "anti-terror" operations; and the Patriot Act, which grants the government unprecedented spying rights.

Now, FirstNet risks making way for further incursions against Americans' privacy. The Intecept highlights the case of two Vermont men who are suing the government in a transparency case, arguing that the government is required by the terms of the E-Government Act of 2002 to conduct a Privacy Impact Assessment on FirstNet, as the super highway would ostensibly be used in many situations to transfer personal information about American citizens.

But as FirstNet is formed from a public-private partnership, the government argues the rules do not apply because the network is owned by AT&T.


01.08.2018 - Pentagon JEDI Program Likely to be Serviced by Amazon
Pentagon JEDI Program Likely to be Serviced by Amazon

Analysts and insiders told the Washington Times that Amazon is the military’s top choice to secure its contract for a cloud project called the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure (JEDI), which is reportedly meant to revolutionize the way the Pentagon shares military data.

Bidding opened for contractors on the project last week, sparking interest throughout the technology sector, ranging from Microsoft to IBM. However, Amazon is reportedly the only company that meets the Defense Department's regulations on handling classified information.


Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump

Washington Post employees want to go on strike because Bezos isn’t paying them enough. I think a really long strike would be a great idea. Employees would get more money and we would get rid of Fake News for an extended period of time! Is @WaPo a registered lobbyist?
9:26 AM - Jun 17, 2018

That's not so much of a surprise. Amazon's all-powerful Amazon Web Services (AWS) is already used by many different branches and sub-branches of the US government. In 2013, AWS won a cloud contract with the ever-secretive CIA, and Amazon touts its work with the State Department, Homeland Security's United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the FDA, several NASA projects and more.

Analysts tell the Washington Times that the project is so valued that companies may rework their cloud storage structures in order to meet the Pentagon's demands.


Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump

I have stated my concerns with Amazon long before the Election. Unlike others, they pay little or no taxes to state & local governments, use our Postal System as their Delivery Boy (causing tremendous loss to the U.S.), and are putting many thousands of retailers out of business!
7:57 AM - Mar 29, 2018

The deal may come as a slap in the face to US President Donald Trump, who consistently rails against Amazon and its CEO Jeff Bezos, as well as the Bezos-owned Washington Post. On June 17, Trump encouraged Amazon workers to have a "really long strike."

Amazon workers did strike in July, although the stoppage wasn't really long: just three days to hit the company where it hurt during its annual Prime Day sale.

In Spain, 1,800 workers went on strike, and thousands of others followed suit in Germany and Poland, as Bezos' net worth broke $150 billion, making him the richest man in modern history. Some of the workers in Spain were beaten by police while demonstrating at an Amazon warehouse.
 
Last edited:
03.08.2018 - Facebook Users Report Social Media is Down in US, Europe
Facebook Users Report Social Media is Down in US, Europe

The reasons behind the technical issue are unclear, whereas Facebook has not yet commented on the matter.

According to the website Downdetector, social media users in Europe, as well as parts of the US have been experiencing issues with Facebook, being unable to download the web page.

Most users experiencing problems with the social networks are located in Europe (the UK, the Netherlands), the US and Japan. There are also reports of service's disruption in Latin America and Australia.

Facebook outage map:
Facebook Users Report Social Media is Down in US, Europe

Many netizens took to Twitter to express their concern over the technical issues they experience when accessing the website.
 
Facebook’s Chief Security Officer, Alex Stamos, has left the company as it faces intensifying scrutiny for the platform’s user data practices.
3 Aug 2018
Alex Stamos, Facebook’s chief security officer since 2015, has left the company to take a position at Stanford University, according to TechCrunch. Following severe scrutiny over user data practices and foreign actors allegedly utilizing Facebook’s platform for political purposes, a number of Facebook executives have left the company — Stamos is the latest to move on.
In a Facebook post, Stamos discussed his decision to leave the company saying:

For the last three years, I have been proud to work with some of the most skilled and dedicated security professionals in the world in one of the most difficult threat environments faced by any technology company. We have worked together to build new protections around user data, improve the security of products used by billions, roll out innovative encryption and privacy protections at unprecedented scale, and study and react to new classes of abuse by the world’s most advanced adversaries.
While I have greatly enjoyed this work, the time has come for me to move on from my position as Chief Security Officer at Facebook. Starting in September, I will join Stanford University full-time as a teacher and researcher.

Rumors have been circulating since March that Stamos may depart the social media firm. He is said to have to disagreed with how Facebook handled the disclosure and investigation into allegations of Russian intelligence using the platform to spread disinformation. Stamos said in March that, “despite the rumors, I’m still fully engaged with my work at Facebook,” but he did acknowledge that his role at the company had been shifted to focus on “emerging security risks and working on election security.”

“This fall, I am very excited to launch a course teaching hands-on offensive and defensive techniques and to contribute to the new cybersecurity master’s specialty at [the Freeman-Spogli Institute for International Studies],” Stamos said.“ My last day at Facebook will be August 17th. and while I will no longer have the pleasure of working side by side with my friends there, I am encouraged that there are so many dedicated, thoughtful and skilled people continuing to tackle these challenges. It is critical that we as an industry live up to our collective responsibility to consider the impact of what we build, and I look forward to continued collaboration and partnership with the security and safety teams at Facebook.”

Facebook is about to lose a number of long-term employees, such as the company’s Chief Legal Officer Colin Stretch, who has worked at the company for more than eight years. Elliot Schrage, the company’s head of policy and comms left recently as did Jan Kourm the co-founder of Facebook-owned messaging app WhatsApp.

 
04.08.2018 - Facebook: How Far Will It Fall?
Facebook: How Far Will It Fall?

Facebook's stock fell over 20% following reports of less-than-expected earnings after the company has struggled to fight fake news, censorship accusations, and the flight of some of its users.

The over $120 billion that the company lost infamously makes it the largest loss in stock market history, and CEO and founder Mark Zuckerberg reportedly had over $17 billion wiped out.

The shock set in immediately, with pundits and regular users alike wondering just how far Facebook will fall and whether the platform's best days are now behind it, and some even went as far as speculating that it'll soon become the "next MySpace" and end up all but irrelevant.

From being indirectly implicated in the Russiagate conspiracy for supposedly allowing fake news to be peddled on its platform to being exposed earlier this year for allowing Cambridge Analytica to harvest its users' data for political purposes, it's fair to say that Facebook has been in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons over the past couple of years. On top of that, some politically active users who defy Mainstream Media dogma have alleged that they're being "shadow blocked", meaning that the algorithm is suppressing their account's so-called "organic reach", or sometimes outright censored through frivolous blocking. In turn, these people and their friends have migrated away from Facebook and to competitors like VKontakte.

This wouldn't ordinarily be a problem for Facebook had it not been for the successful awareness campaign that Alt-Media has conducted in drawing attention to the company's liberal bias, incidentally helped along by several high-profile scandals against conservatives and highlighted by Breitbart, among others.

Facebook generates most of its revenue from selling ads, so any speculation about its suspected suppression of certain categories of accounts for political purposes would obviously impact on its earnings. Additionally, the measures that the company is taking to fight fake news and prevent third parties from tricking users into voluntarily giving up their data like Cambridge Analytica did are thought to negatively affect its business model.

At this point, there's no denying that Facebook is in the throes of its largest-ever crisis and that Zuckerberg's leadership over his brainchild is increasingly in doubt as proverbial pitchfork-wielding shareholders demand his resignation, though it remains to be seen whether the company can weather what might at this point be an existential crisis or if it'll go the way of MySpace in the coming years.

Andrew Korybko is joined by Patrick Henningsen, Executive Editor of the news and analysis website, 21stCenturyWire.com, and Joaquin Flores, Chief Editor of Fort Russ News and Director of the Center for Syncretic Studies, (Podcast)
 
Tweets
One day after what appeared to be a coordinated attack by media giants Facebook, Apple, Spotify and Google on Alex Jones, whose various social media accounts were banned or suspended in a matter of hours, the crackdown against alternative media figures continued as several Libertarian figures, including the Ron Paul Institute director, found their Twitter accounts suspended

On Monday, Twitter suspended the editorial director of antiwar.com Scott Horton, former State Department employee Peter Van Buren, and Dan McAdams, the executive director of the Ron Paul Institute.


Horton was reportedly disciplined for the use of "improper language" against journalist Jonathan M. Katz, he said in a brief statement, while McAdams was suspended for retweeting him, he said. Past tweets in both accounts were available to the public at the time of the writing, unlike the account of Van Buren, which was fully suspended.

According to TargetLiberty, Horton and McAdams fell victim of Twitter’s suspension algorithm after objecting to Katz’s quarrel with Van Buren over an earlier interview.


The suspensions come days after Twitter suspended black conservative Candace Owen from Twitter for highlighting the algorithmic hypocrisy of Twitter by replacing the word “white” with “Jewish” in a series of tweets modeled on those by New York Times editor Sarah Jeong.

just after controversial conservative Alex Jones, and his podcast InfoWars, were kicked out from most social media platforms, prompting conservative to accuse the social networks of collusion in a collective crackdown on non-mainstream voices. The Silicon Valley giants were criticized by the US political establishment for failing to prevent alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Meanwhile, critics now say the pressured media giants are engaging in political censorship, using their market dominance and lack of legislated neutrality requirements to target descent voices ahead of the midterm elections.


In a scathing op-ed on Tuesday, Nigel Farage wrote that "while many on the libertarian right and within the conservative movement have their issues with Alex Jones and InfoWars, this week’s announcement by YouTube, Facebook, Apple, and Spotify represents a concerted effort of proscription and censorship that could just as soon see any of us confined to the dustbin of social media history."


These platforms that claim to be “open” and in favor of “free speech” are now routinely targeting -- whether by human intervention or not -- the views and expressions of conservatives and anti-globalists.
This is why they no longer even fit the bill of “platforms.” They are publishers in the same way we regard news outlets as publishers. They may use more machine learning and automation, but their systems clearly take editorial positions. We need to hold them to account in the same way we do any other publisher.

Farage then accused social media giants of being corporatist:

That they cannot profess to be neutral, open platforms while being illiberal, dictatorial, and hiding behind the visage of a private corporation (which are more often than not in bed with governments around the world at the very highest levels).
This isn’t capitalism. It’s corporatism.

He concludes that the real interference in "US democracy" comes not from Russia, but from some of its most powerful corporations which now yield more power in some cases than the government itself: "This isn’t “liberal democracy” as they keep pretending. It’s autocracy."

"...for those that don’t take issue with the latest censorship of right-wingers by big social media -- unless we take a stand now, who knows where it could end."


 
What kind of SCAM is Facebook trying to pull off? For what (legit) reason - does Facebook need access to "Bank Customers" - "Private financial data" - when even Law Enforcement is required to go before a Commonwealth Judge - show "Probable Cause" before a Judge can "issue and sign" a Search Warrant to assess financial records from a Bank? Is Zuckerberg pulling a fast-one to help recover from his recent heavy "loss"?

04.08.2018 - Facebook: How Far Will It Fall?
Facebook: How Far Will It Fall?

Facebook's stock fell over 20% following reports of less-than-expected earnings after the company has struggled to fight fake news, censorship accusations, and the flight of some of its users.

The over $120 billion that the company lost infamously makes it the largest loss in stock market history, and CEO and founder Mark Zuckerberg reportedly had over $17 billion wiped out.


07.08.2018 - Reports: Facebook Offers US Banks Access to Users in Exchange for Financial Data
Reports: Facebook Offers US Banks Access to Users in Exchange for Financial Data

US tech giant Facebook has offered some of the largest banks in the country to help them get new clients among the social network's users in exchange for access to financial data of bank customers in order to boost user engagement following the Cambridge Analytica scandal, The Wall Street Journal reported.

JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and US Bancorp were among the banks approached by Facebook in recent months, The Wall Street Journal reported, citing sources familiar with the matter.

The offer was part of the company's efforts to become not just a platform where people can connect with their friends, but also one for selling goods and services, the publication noted.

Banks struggle to increase their customer base, something which may push them into deals with the largest social media platforms, which accumulate billions of users, the newspaper added.

One large bank had already rejected the offer over privacy concerns, the publication said, citing sources.

The social network said it had pledged to protect banking data from third-parties and would not use it in ad targeting.

Facebook faced sharp criticism in March after it emerged that personal data of about 50 million of its users had been harvested by Cambridge Analytica without their permission via a special app. The information was allegedly used to help target political advertising. In early April, Facebook estimated the number of users affected at around 87 million.

In late July, Facebook shares slumped more than 20 percent after its second-quarter report showed a slowdown in the company's revenue and growth of its active users database.


07.08.2018 - Skype Will 'Lose Lots of Customers' Amid 8.0 Version Customer Frustration
Skype Will 'Lose Lots of Customers' Amid 8.0 Version Customer Frustration

According to Microsoft, Skype has always been about bringing people together. However, some of these people have been unhappy since an updated version of the program was rolled out.

Following its original announcement that Skype 7 (or Skype classic) would be discontinued after on September 1, 2018, Microsoft had to retract its plan and let the "old Skype" live.


Skype @Skype

Skype version 8.0—our most powerful, intuitive, and flexible version of Skype yet! Learn more: http://msft.social/fgeAdI
11:02 AM - Jul 18, 2018

An update to a July 20 post on the discontinuation of Skype 7 revealed that "based on customer feedback, we are extending support for Skype 7 (Skype classic) for some time. Our customers can continue to use Skype classic until then."

Many users responded to the update, arguing that "Skype v7 works, nothing needs changing" or suggesting a combination of the old and new versions should be the ultimate product.

Microsoft said that Skype 8.0 would be "adding exciting new features while ensuring it's simple to use with the same familiar interface of Skype version 7.0."

However, many commentators, including a user named SCSparks, share their frustration with the update.

"Classis Skype works perfectly……the updated version doesn't make any sense……..lost most of my contacts, added contacts of people I don't know and now want me to send another invite to be a contact to people I have been Skyping with for years……..can't chat nor speak to a live person……..this system/program is going to lose a lot of customers," the user wrote.

Among the new features that come with Skype 8.0 are Free HD video and screensharing calls, more productive messaging, chat media gallery, share photos, videos, and other files (up to 300 MB at a time).
 
Back
Top Bottom