MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Facebook’

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »

All the technocrats agree: “Free speech” does not include the right to question vaccines, transgenderism, chemtrails, GMOs or the pharmaceutical cartels

Posted by M. C. on December 10, 2019

Just like communist China with its “social credit score” scheme, American tech giants like Google, Facebook, Twitter, and many others are actively surveilling the content that’s shared through their platforms in order to assign users varying degrees of “free speech rights” depending on their viewpoints.

https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-12-08-technocrats-agree-free-speech-doesnt-include-vaccines-transgenderism-chemtrails-gmos.html

by:

(Natural News) Now that World Wide Web founder Tim Berners-Lee has announced a new “Contract for the Web” that he says will serve as “a road map to build a better web,” many are asking themselves: What’s to become of online free speech as we enter the year 2020?

Even though Berners-Lee insists that his Contract for the Web is about upholding “digital rights,” the tech giants that are onboard with it, including Google and Facebook, are doing the exact opposite by restricting the First Amendment rights of people online, and even calling free speech “disastrous.”

How, then, is Big Tech now claiming to support Berners-Lee’s vision of fostering a “healthy conversation online?” The answer is simple: “Digital rights” and “free speech” only apply to certain subjects, topics, and perspectives, while all others are off-limits.

As long as you’re in agreement with Google and Facebook about vaccines being “safe and effective,” as one example, then you’re free to post as much “free speech” on their platforms as you’d like. But if you point out the fact that vaccines contain the entire gene sequences of aborted human babies, then you suddenly no longer have any free speech.

The same applies to the Cult of LGBTQ. If you express any opposition on Facebook to Drag Queen Story Hour events and the transgender indoctrination of children, then your “free speech” suddenly becomes hate speech, meaning it’s no longer allowed and could even cost you your career.

For more related news about online censorship and the destruction of internet free speech by the technocrats, be sure to check out Censorship.news.

The tech cabal is leading the United States right into tyrannical communism by eliminating free speech and dubbing all opposing viewpoints as “hate speech”

Just like communist China with its “social credit score” scheme, American tech giants like Google, Facebook, Twitter, and many others are actively surveilling the content that’s shared through their platforms in order to assign users varying degrees of “free speech rights” depending on their viewpoints.

If you’re someone whose perspectives closely align with those of the deep state, then you’re given free-reign to post and share whatever you’d like. But if you even dare to mention the word “geoengineering” on your page or profile, then you could be tagged as a “conspiracy theorist” whose content needs to be shadow-banned or otherwise censored for “wrongspeak.”

Pointing out that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are largely untested and completely unnecessary is another punishable offense on social media, as is drawing attention to the fact that pharmaceuticals are dangerous and often inferior to their natural, unpatented counterparts.

Unless you’re someone who believes that all vaccines are safe and effective; that fluoride in drinking water is good for the human body; that GMOs are awesome and the solution to “climate change;” that some men have periods and some women have penises; and that Hillary Clinton should have been president and Donald Trump should be impeached, then you won’t be afforded the same “free speech” rights as those who believe all of these things to be undeniable facts.

Hollywood actor Rob Schneider got it right when he tweeted that true free speech includes all free speech – “[e]ven the speech that you find repugnant,” he wrote unequivocally.

“We don’t need people deciding FOR us what to think, see or hear. That’s a load of totalitarian crap,” he further wrote, emphasizing precisely what our Founding Fathers would be saying were they alive today.

For more news stories about how Americans’ free speech rights are under constant assault, be sure to visit FirstAmendment.news.

Be seeing you

mark of the beast

The Mark of the Beast

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Alternative News Reasons Why Many People Refuse The Flu Shot: Facebook Has No Right Censor This Information

Posted by M. C. on December 5, 2019

https://www.collective-evolution.com/2019/12/03/reasons-why-many-people-refuse-the-flu-shot-facebook-has-no-right-censor-this-information/

By

In Brief

  • The Facts:Despite the fact that Facebook and other platforms like Google are censoring important information pertaining to vaccines, science is science and should be made freely available. Studies show that the flu vaccine is not really effective.
  • Reflect On:Why are terms like “anti-vax” and ridicule used by advocates of vaccines instead of simply addressing and countering the points made by vaccine safety advocates?

If you haven’t already heard, Facebook is censoring information and articles about vaccines that are “anti-vax” or information that in some way paint vaccines in a harmful light. This is extremely concerning, because there are a number of experts in the field, doctors and scientists, who have been publishing research in several peer-reviewed journals that do bring up concerns about vaccines. It’s simply facts, information and science, yet it’s still being censored which makes no sense.

Why is Facebook limiting the reach of posts and articles that are presenting peer-reviewed science and the view-points and research of medical health professionals and scientists? Is it because Facebook’s ‘fact checkers’ are funded by big pharmaceutical interests? An important question to ask. FakeNews watchdog NewsGuard aims to hold independent media accountable for their stories. Funded by Clinton donors and big pharma, with ties to the CFR, NewsGuard seems to have a clear agenda in favour of mainstream media. That’s one example, and  you can read more about that here. Why does mainstream media always use ridicule and terms like “anti-vax” instead of simply addressing and countering the concerns made by vaccine safety advocates, like the points presented in this article?

When it comes to the flu vaccine specifically, Dr. Alvin Moss, MD and professor at the West Virginia University School of Medicine emphasizes in this video:

The flu vaccine happens to be the vaccine that causes the most injury in this country. The vaccine injury compensation program, 40 percent of all vaccinations in this country are flu shots, but 60 percent of all the compensations are for the flu vaccine. So a disproportionate number of  vaccine related injuries are the flu shot. I think many of you it’s been recommended to you that you get the flu shot, I don’t know if you’re aware of the fact, the CDC statistics are, that every year they look at vaccine effectiveness, for this particular year the vaccine effectiveness is 48 percent, so that means it’s not highly effective. It’s not even all that effective, if you look at the scientific literature…the evidence to support giving the flu vaccine is moderate to weak. It is not strong evidence. They say the evidence to support giving the flu vaccine to people over the age of 65 is not there, it’s inconclusive. So a lot of the things we’ve been told as Americans about vaccinations are not really based on the science. (source)

Here’s a great video of Doctor Toni Bark, who has been the medical director for various departments and hospitals, explaining why vaccines are not a one size fits all product. Here’s another one of Dr. Mary Holland, who is a professor at New York University School of Law. This is evident when one examines the The National Childhood Vaccine Injury (NCVIA), because it’s already paid out approximately $4 billion to compensate families of vaccine injured children. As astronomical as the monetary awards are, they’re even more alarming considering HHS claims that only an estimated 1% of vaccine injuries are even reported to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS).

If the numbers from VAERS and HHS are correct – only 1% of vaccine injuries are reported and only 1/3 of the petitions are compensated – then up to 99% of vaccine injuries go unreported and the families of the vast majority of people injured by vaccines are picking up the costs, once again, for vaccine maker’s flawed products. Furthermore, this act safeguards pharmaceutical companies from harm, meaning that they cannot be sued or blamed, nor held accountable for their productscausing injury. Therefore, vaccines are a liability free product that are being mandated on children, the manufacturers have no incentive to make a safe product.

What We Did As A Result of Censorship…

The Takeaway

We are living in an age where access to information is becoming extremely limited. Independent media outlets that present information and evidence, no matter how well sourced, are being blocked and threatened by social media platforms like Facebook and organizations like Google if the narrative threatens various corporate and political agendas. This censorship should serve humanity, and play a role in waking up even more people as to just how wrong this is, clearly, there are many people out there who are feeling threatened by organizations that share credible information that threatens their interests. At the end of the day, truth cannot be stopped and will continue to leak out on various topics. When it comes to vaccines, science, and the questioning of vaccine safety should obviously encouraged, and not shunned.

Highly Recommended: Flu Vaccine Facts: What You Need to Know for 2018-19

Be seeing you

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Data on your spending habits could be a gold mine for banks

Posted by M. C. on December 2, 2019

Banks know many of our deepest, darkest secrets — that series of bills paid at a cancer clinic, for instance, or that big strip-club tab that you thought stayed in Vegas. A bank might suspect someone’s adulterous affair long before the betrayed partner would.

Only if you let them and are dumb enough to pay a strip club bill or pay your liquor store bill or buy your ammo or … with plastic.

https://www.fox5ny.com/news/data-on-your-spending-habits-could-be-a-gold-mine-for-banks

NEW YORK – There’s a powerful new player watching what you buy so it can tailor product offerings for you: the bank behind your credit or debit card.

For years, Google and Facebook have been showing ads based on your online behavior. Retailers from Amazon to Walgreens also regularly suction up your transaction history to steer future spending and hold your loyalty.

Now banks, too, want to turn data they already have on your spending habits into extra revenue by identifying likely customers for retailers. Banks are increasingly aware that they could be sitting on a gold mine of information that can be used to predict — or sway — where you spend. Historically, such data has been used mostly for fraud protection.

Suppose you were to treat yourself to lunch on Cyber Monday, the busiest online shopping day of the year. If you order ahead at Chipotle — paying, of course, with your credit card — you might soon find your bank dangling 10% off lunch at Little Caesars. The bank would earn fees from the pizza joint, both for showing the offer and processing the payment.

Wells Fargo began customizing retail offers for individual customers on Nov. 21, joining Chase, Bank of America, PNC, SunTrust and a slew of smaller banks.

Unlike Google or Facebook, which try to infer what you’re interested in buying based on your searches, web visits or likes, “banks have the secret weapon in that they actually know what we spend money on,” said Silvio Tavares of the trade group CardLinx Association, whose members help broker purchase-related offers. “It’s a better predictor of what we’re going to spend on.”

While banks say they’re moving cautiously and being mindful of privacy concerns, it’s not clear that consumers are fully aware of what their banks are up to.

Banks know many of our deepest, darkest secrets — that series of bills paid at a cancer clinic, for instance, or that big strip-club tab that you thought stayed in Vegas. A bank might suspect someone’s adulterous affair long before the betrayed partner would.

“Ten years ago, your bank was like your psychiatrist or your minister — your bank kept secrets,” said Ed Mierzwinski, a consumer advocate at the U.S. Public Interest Research Group. Now, he says, “they think they are the same as a department store or an online merchant.”…

Be seeing you

With new ecosystems, is the future bright for banking?

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Silicon Valley’s War Against ‘White, Male Conservatives’ Is a War Against America

Posted by M. C. on December 1, 2019

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/09/30/silicon-valley-war-against-white-male-conservatives-war-against-america.html

Robert Bridge

With the termination of a YouTube account, or simple tweak of an algorithm, the tech company monsters – Google, Facebook, YouTube and Twitter – are able to deprive millions of Americans of conservative news sources, undermining both the Constitution and the spirit of democracy.

In a perfectly wired world, the gatekeepers of the Internet would limit themselves specifically to the technical aspects of their job, ensuring that a well-oiled matrix runs smoothly and effectively for the end user. But alas, we do not inhabit a perfect world.

Political bias runs far and deep inside of Silicon Valley, and following the defeat of Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election, the tech giants are now poised to make life very difficult for conservatives. That much was plain to see in a shocking video of a Google meeting, chaired by the company’s founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, just days after U.S. voters sent Donald Trump to the White House.

Brin kicked off the cry fest by stating, “Let’s face it, most people here are pretty upset and pretty sad because of the election…As an immigrant and a refugee I certainly find this election deeply offensive and I know many of you do too.”

What followed from there was one Google executive after another describing their disappointment with the election, some actually shedding tears, interspersed with bold promises to better “advocate for our values,” which is just another way of saying that Conservative values are worthless and the Democrats now have a moral duty to fulfill.

Now had this been an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting, or a get together of Democratic political pollsters, such lamentations would have been understandable. But coming from Google, the world’s premier search engine of news and information, it was downright creepy.

There were already calls of despair coming from inside the Google fortress before this very cringe-worthy meeting. James Damore, an engineer at the tech company, made headlines with a 10-page memo he wrote entitled, “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber,” which exposed the ‘discriminatory’ hiring practices Google allegedly endorses.

Damore, together with another former Google engineer, David Gudeman, followed up on the memo with a lawsuit that accused Google of cultivating a corporate culture that regularly admonishes “politically conservative white men”.

“Google’s management goes to extreme — and illegal — lengths to encourage hiring managers to take protected categories such as race and/or gender into consideration as determinative hiring factors, to the detriment of Caucasian and male employees and potential employees at Google,” the suit reads. “Not only was the numerical presence of women celebrated at Google solely due to their gender, but the presence of Caucasians and males was mocked with ‘boos’ during company- wide weekly meetings.”

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1034456273306243076?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1034456273306243076&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnet.com%2Fnews%2Ftrump-is-turning-up-the-heat-against-google%2F

Perhaps most explosive, Damore and Gudeman’s lawsuit goes on to claim that the company maintains “blacklists,” which are allegedly designed to prevent employees with conservative views from obtaining promotions within Google, which also, incidentally, owns YouTube.

Earlier this month, Google, which came under attack by Donald Trump for “suppressing voices of Conservatives,” refused to attend a Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. This would have given lawmakers the chance to grill the company over claims of bias, which does seem to have a tendency to skew algorithms against white males.

To illustrate the point, as The Unz Review reported, I would encourage the reader to perform a quick Google search for ‘American inventors’ and see where famous white innovators rank in Google’s world.  Of the top ten names on the list, only Alexander Graham Bell represents the white Caucasian males, the other nine are African Americans. Clearly, something is very wrong with that picture. While the black community certainly had their share of innovators, how is it remotely conceivable that the Wright Brothers, Henry Ford, Albert Einstein, Nikola Tesla, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs – and so many other creative white guys – fail to rank not just in the top ten, but in the top twenty?

What seems to be happening is that the aversion to the “white male conservatives” that Damore and Gudeman spoke of inside of Google is starting to radically impact search results, gradually denying white males their proper place in the history books. This is nothing less than the deliberate rewriting of history. Personally speaking, these efforts must be challenged before it gets completely out of control and reality is turned on its head by a ‘private company’ with a noxious, biased and prejudiced worldview.

In any case, it seems James Damore became an inspiration to other right-leaning (or simply ‘freedom leaning’) Silicon Valley employees, and not just those getting bean bag chairs, neck massages and free lunches while they sell out white male Conservatives down the river on Google’s sprawling campus. Last month, Brian Amerige, a senior Facebook engineer, disseminated on Facebook’s internal message board a memo entitled,“We Have a Problem With Political Diversity,” which was obtained by The New York Times.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1022447980408983552?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1022447980408983552&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.vox.com%2Fpolicy-and-politics%2F2018%2F8%2F18%2F17749450%2Ftrump-twitter-bias-alex-jones-infowars

“We are a political monoculture that’s intolerant of different views,” Amerige proclaimed. “We claim to welcome all perspectives, but are quick to attack — often in mobs — anyone who presents a view that appears to be in opposition to left-leaning ideology.”

Since news of the letter went viral, more than 100 Facebook employees joined Amerige in a call for more diversity inside of the social media titan. However, that is a tiny fraction of the company’s some 25,000 employees, which don’t seem ready to declare mutiny against its founder and chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg. Indeed, just after publication of the memo, Alex Jones, founder of InfoWars, was banned from Facebook, Youtube and Twitter, as the internet inquisition against conservative voices ratcheted up, and just as the momentous midterm elections approaching fast.

Speaking of Twitter, last month its Jack Dorsey admitted the company has a problem when it comes to making sure its politics, which are left-leaning, do not manipulate profiles.

“I mean, we have a lot of conservative-leaning folks in the company as well, and to be honest, they don’t feel safe to express their opinions at the company,” Dorsey told Recode in an interview.

“They do feel silenced by just the general swirl of what they perceive to be the broader percentage of leanings within the company, and I don’t think that’s fair or right.”

But it’s not just Twitter employees who are feeling silenced.

This month, actor James Woods, who has over 1 million followers on Twitter, was locked out of his Twitter account over a humorous meme he sent out months ago that the social media company said “has the potential to be misleading in a way that could impact an election.”

In an interview with The Associated Press, Woods said he was told he’d be allowed back on Twitter only if he deletes the tweet. Woods said he would not comply.

“Free speech is free speech — it’s not Jack Dorsey’s version of free speech,” the actor said.

Given this oppressive, anti-conservative mindset that now dominates the major tech firms – which only appears in rare and very brave manifestations of employees risking their jobs and reputations to get the truth out, or from conservative voices getting censored – the need for some sort of ‘Internet Constitution’, which promotes the rights of every man, woman and child to express themselves as they feel appropriate, seems to be the only answer.

In the meantime, we can be sure that the grand myth being peddled by our politicians and tech firm CEOs about how the Russians are destroying our democratic institutions will only get louder.

 

Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Does Hillary Clinton Want Fact-Checking… or Censorship?

Posted by M. C. on November 17, 2019

Imagine, for a moment, what might happen if various Democrat politicians came under attack by opponent ads. Let’s say Hillary Clinton runs for president again. Would she demand the media ban an ad that begins, “Hillary Clinton says she is a champion of women’s rights. Then why does she protect powerful men suspected of rape?”

Al Sharpton was one promoter of the infamous Tawana Brawley hoax. His history of accuracy is about as good as Alex Jones’, who initially claimed that the Sandy Hook school massacre was a hoax. I don’t expect that Zuckerberg will sit down with Alex Jones to hear his demands soon.

https://www.intellectualtakeout.org/article/does-hillary-clinton-want-fact-checking-or-censorship

Barry Brownstein

 

Does Hillary Clinton Want Fact-Checking… or Censorship?

Recently Hillary Clinton blasted Facebook, Tweeting:

Facebook’s decision to allow false information in political advertisements is appalling.

Voters are being confronted by millions of pieces of misinformation.

A world where up is down and down is up is a world where democracy can’t thrive.

Other Democrats joined in. Virginia Senator Mark Warner said: “Facebook’s new ads policy allows politicians to run demonstrably false advertising on its platform. I don’t think that’s right.”

Both Clinton and Warner were referring to Facebook’s announced policy of exempting political ads from fact-checking. But in a world where Snopes fact checks the satirical Babylon Bee, we should all be skeptical of the fact-checking they have in mind.

It’s hard to imagine good intentions motivate these politicians. In any case, good intentions are not enough. Media fact-checking can easily be biased and result in censorship of views critical to various candidates.

Imagine, for a moment, what might happen if various Democrat politicians came under attack by opponent ads. Let’s say Hillary Clinton runs for president again. Would she demand the media ban an ad that begins, “Hillary Clinton says she is a champion of women’s rights. Then why does she protect powerful men suspected of rape?”

If Elizabeth Warren gets the Democratic nomination, would she ask for a ban on a hard-hitting ad that says something like:

Elizabeth Warren is a serial liar. Now she is lying again when she says the middle class won’t pay for her vast new spending programs. Economist Antony Davies says: ‘The 550 US billionaires together are worth $2.5 trillion. If we confiscated 100% of their wealth, we’d raise enough to run the federal government for less than 8 months. Perhaps our problem isn’t how much billionaires have but how much politicians spend.’ Senator Warren, your facts are wrong again.

If Bernie Sanders gets the nomination, he’d be outraged by an ad questioning why Sanders cozies up to communist dictators or one questioning his wife’s financial dealings.

How about a potential ad targeting Minnesota congresswoman Ilhan Omar? “Minnesota has a proud history of tolerance. There is no room for an anti-Semitic hate monger in Congress.” Will a future fact-checker reject this ad because Omar and her supporters claim critics are “twisting her words”?

But let’s go beyond politicians. What about ads for public policies?

Should ads that argue for a ban on exposing young children to bewildering information on gender dysphoria be banned as “hateful”? Just over ten years ago, confusion over sexual identity was called gender identity disorder; no professional would have recommended that a seven-year-old boy begin transitioning to a girl at the urging of a parent.

Or imagine the outrage over a campaign ad calling for an overhaul of welfare programs saying the worst poverty “is not material poverty but poverty of soul.” Fact-checkers might say the ad blames innocent victims of poverty and is therefore false.

Since the official verdict is that Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide, would a fact-checker reject an ad demanding an investigation into the coverup of his possible murder?

Recently Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook’s Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg held a two hour “no-holds-barred” meeting with Al Sharpton and other “civil rights activists.” The meeting took place at Zuckerberg’s home; discussions centered on Sharpton’s objections to Facebook’s “decision not to fact-check ads and other content from politicians.”

Al Sharpton was one promoter of the infamous Tawana Brawley hoax. His history of accuracy is about as good as Alex Jones’, who initially claimed that the Sandy Hook school massacre was a hoax. I don’t expect that Zuckerberg will sit down with Alex Jones to hear his demands soon.

Political commentary and political ads have long included elements short on facts. Vigorous campaigns are a strength of our political system, not a weakness. Unlike other countries where “slandering” the leader can lead to imprisonment or death, politicians in America are not above criticism.

In Nazi Germany, it was an official fact that Jews were Untermensch, subhuman mongrels. In pre-Civil War America, it was a fact that slaveowners could treat blacks as property. Freedom of speech allows individuals to challenge “facts.”

Collectivists, including democratic socialists, always aim to suppress speech. Because their plans never stand up to reality, they must stifle the resulting dissent. Is that why Hillary Clinton and others want to suppress alternative views?

“Whether you can observe a thing depends upon the theory which you use,” observed Einstein. Often what is being disputed in politics are not facts but interpretations of events. If you have the right politics, there are very few things the media will not overlook.

Suppression of speech – not “false information” – threatens our Republic

Be seeing you

bubba

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Facebook app has been quietly turning on people’s cameras | Metro News

Posted by M. C. on November 14, 2019

Ooops!

That is why tape comes in so many colors. To match your device when you cover the camera.

If the NSA can figure out how to remotely turn on cameras, so can anyone else.

https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/13/facebook-app-quietly-turning-peoples-cameras-freaking-11088107/

Jasper Hamill

 

Many people have wondered if their apps are secretly spying on them. So paranoid 21st-century folk may not be entirely happy to hear about a ‘bug’ which turns on their phone’s camera whilst they’re using the Facebook app. The glitch affects iPhone owners, who said their camera suddenly switched itself on while they were scrolling through their feed, watching videos or looking at photos. When people turned the video to full-screen mode and then switched back to Facebook’s normal view, they could see a little open space on the left and the camera app in the background. Several people have tweeted about the bug and it has been replicated by tech journalists. Daryl Lasafin, a creative director, tweeted: ‘Facebook app on iOS 13.2.2 opens my phone’s rear camera when I open a profile photo swipe down to return (look at the little slit on the left of the video). Is this an app bug or an iOS bug??’ Joshua Maddox, a web designer and digital strategist, tweeted: ‘Found a Facebook security & privacy issue. When the app is open it actively uses the camera. I found a bug in the app that lets you see the camera open behind your feed.’ Today, while watching a video on @facebook, I rotated to landscape and could see the Facebook/Instagram Story UI for a split second. When rotating back to portrait, the Story camera/UI opened entirely. A little worrying…

The social network has admitted the bug exists and rushed out a fix to the App Store. Guy Rosen, Facebook VP of integrity, wrote: ‘We recently discovered our iOS app incorrectly launched in landscape. In fixing that last week in v246 we inadvertently introduced a bug where the app partially navigates to the camera screen when a photo is tapped. We have no evidence of photos/videos uploaded due to this.’ ‘We’ve shipped the fix to App Store and are waiting for it to be approved. Team is still digging into details including about the state of the camera after the bug is first triggered (which relates to your Q), expect to be able to update you later today.’
Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/13/facebook-app-quietly-turning-peoples-cameras-freaking-11088107/?ito=cbshare

Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MetroUK/

Be seeing you

?u=http3.bp.blogspot.com-RyZoWRXIWCEVYvy1kjz7cIAAAAAAAAjU0UNVQWIcBOuAs1600google-chrome-spying.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

How Facebook Has Become The Strategic Media Mouthpiece For The Global Elite – Collective Evolution

Posted by M. C. on November 12, 2019

And it wasn’t until a week later that I realized that Variety Magazine reported that Facebook Watch, which is Facebook’s media platform, had reached a multi-million dollar deal with CNN, Fox News, ABC, and large media outlets.

https://www.collective-evolution.com/2019/11/11/how-facebook-has-become-the-strategic-media-mouthpiece-for-the-global-elite/

By CE Staff Writer

In Brief

  • The Facts:Facebook has made deals with mainstream media outlets to pay for their news content, further turning Facebook from a neutral social media platform into a conglomerate that supports a political bias and the agenda of the global elite.
  • Reflect On:What can conscious media outlets do to overcome growing censorship and mainstream bias from the big tech companies and ensure that you continue to get neutral, agenda-free news coverage and commentary on the issues of the day?

It’s not clear whether Facebook was truly conceived by an innocent genius with noble intent, but one fact has become abundantly clear: Facebook is now a mouthpiece and tool for the proliferation of mainstream perception. This is specifically designed to enrich the global elite and continue to disenfranchise ordinary citizens and any attempts to bring important truths to light that would threaten the elite. And, of course, Mark Zuckerberg is now a ‘junior partner’ in this global elite.

The episode of the Jimmy Dore show found in the video below, which is worth watching to get the full context of the discussion, introduces whistleblower Vikram Kumar, a former promoter of third-party videos on Facebook. Dore brings interesting insights into Facebook’s latest strategies in terms of controlling the news commentary. He explains how Facebook is proliferating the establishment’s narrative while limiting and blocking alternative voices which, of course, Facebook characterizes as ‘Fake News’. Here, Kumar discusses Mark Zuckerberg’s testimony in Congress to this effect:

Returning Media To The Global Elite’s Control

The process of bringing fundamentally liberating technologies like social media under control has been a difficult process, but the global elite seems to feel they are getting a handle on it. Since the big media giants Google, Facebook, Youtube and others are now strictly following the global elite playbook, with special algorithms and thinly-veiled censorship strategies, the process of promoting the elite agenda while suppressing dissenting voices is in full swing.

One of the biggest issues to remedy was the lack of viewership that traditional mainstream media was getting from young people, which is really the target market not only for advertisers but the social engineering wing of the global elite as well. Here’s how Kumar describes it:

As you know, young people, they don’t watch cable… the viewership of Fox News, CNN, and ABC are dying off, they’re getting older and older, and so what Facebook is, is access to young people, right, and so they viewed small anti-establishment media outlets such as yourself as an existential threat to their next generation of revenue.

Tech companies view media companies extremely valuably, you could go back to 1996, there was that merger between Microsoft, General Electric and NBC to create MSNBC.com. A lot of people don’t know that the ‘MS’ in MSNBC stands for Microsoft, and the reason why media companies and tech companies are so intertwined with each other is ’cause you can influence young people so much when you have the distribution network of something like Facebook, and with Facebook Watch, and their media platform, and their deal with CNN, Fox News, and ABC, they’re able to indoctrinate the next generation of young people. And so they want to take viewership away from shows like yours, and put those young people that haven’t been paying attention with cable news back into the pockets of companies like Fox News, ABC, and CNN.

Every media company wants some of that Facebook Watch dough. And so the companies that have coverage that Facebook doesn’t like are out of there, and new companies that have coverage that Facebook likes are back into the deal. And so Facebook is already taking steps to craft the political landscape in the framing that they find positively. And so you get that whole thing where Facebook shuts down over 800 political pages and accounts, and even legitimate political pages that expose things like police brutality… you’re already seeing a coordinated effort from the establishment media and tech companies to kind of craft the narrative for young people.

This is how that Variety Magazine article Kumar talked about characterizes the deal between Facebook and Mainstream Media:

After going through the fake-news wringer, Facebook is shelling out money on original news content. The strategy is partly aimed at driving up viewing on its Facebook Watch platform — but it also is supposed to demonstrate the social-media giant’s commitment to funding trustworthy journalism.

A corporate conglomerate now giving itself the authority to judge what is and isn’t trustworthy journalism. What could possibly go wrong?…

The Takeaway

Conscious media outlets, like us here at Collective Evolution, are in the crosshairs of the recent efforts on the part of Facebook and other large media conglomerates to selectively control the proliferation of information. Our best hope in these times is that the awakening community makes deliberate choices in terms of which sources to tune in to. While the global elite may have the power, the wealth, and the technology, they are still pushing an agenda, which to discerning minds looks and sounds very different from the unbiased truth.

Our hope is that a growing number of people are seeing through the agenda of the global elite enough to be motivated to ensure that conscious media survives, and then thrives. One of the future goals of our Conscious Media Movement campaign is to strengthen an alliance between ourselves and other conscious media outlets and work together to find ways we can amplify the voice of truth and neutrality.

One of the first steps we are taking in our CMM campaign is to fund an Investigative Journalism team to join our efforts here at CE. To help support this, click here. 

Be seeing you

?u=httpscdn-images-1.medium.commax12001*_dsY4TGQw-4mcGz9UK_McA.jpeg&f=1&nofb=1

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Comments Off on How Facebook Has Become The Strategic Media Mouthpiece For The Global Elite – Collective Evolution

THOUGHT POLICE: Facebook, YouTube, Twitter all ban any mention of “whistleblower” Eric Ciaramella as the Overton Window of allowable speech collapses – NaturalNews.com

Posted by M. C. on November 11, 2019

https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-11-09-thought-police-facebook-youtube-twitter-ban-eric-ciaramella.html

by:

(Natural News) Anyone publishing the name of the so-called deep state CIA “whistleblower” Eric Ciaramella is being systematically de-platformed by Google, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter.

This is happening because lawless Leftists fully understand that the more people learn about Eric Ciaramella, the more rapidly the “Ukrainegate” impeachment hoax collapses.

An insane effort has been undertaken by the entire CIA-run fake news media and CIA-puppeted tech giants to memory hole the name “Eric Ciaramella” and erase it from reality.

What they are really trying to pull off is history’s first secret impeachment proceedings characterized by anonymous accusers who may never be identified, cross-examined or even named.

This smacks of the very kind of secret kangaroo courts run by the KGB in the old Soviet Union, where the person being accused is never allowed to confront their accuser or even know what crimes they’re being accused of committing. Left-wing criminal congressman Adam Schiff would have fit right in with the KGB secret police.

In order to achieve this Orwellian goal of complete secrecy and obfuscation of the facts, the tech giants are now aggressively de-platforming any channel that mentions the name “Ciaramella” in text, images or videos. This action is predicated on the coordinated liberal lie that falsely claims naming whistleblowers is somehow against the law.

It turns out it isn’t. That’s why the left-wing media itself routinely names whistleblowers if doing so is calculated to be able to harm President Trump, Kavanaugh or other prominent conservatives. (Remember the Christine Blasey Ford circus against Kavanaugh? Ford’s name wasn’t blacklisted from the internet…)

“Facebook is removing any mention of the potential whistleblower’s name and is cracking down against Facebook publishers that mention any allegation of the potential whistleblower’s name, claiming they are violating Facebook’s Community Standards and Policies,” reports Breitbart.com. “Administrators of Breitbart News’ Facebook page began receiving notifications on Wednesday evening stating that Breitbart’s page is ‘at risk of being unpublished’ but were not given any details as to why, or even which posts were allegedly at issue.”

Facebook and the other tech giants are now running a coordinated memory hole operation to hide the identity of a criminal deep state coup operative from the American people. This reminds us of the CIA-controlled fake news media memory holing any mention of the CDC scientist (Dr. William Thompson) who publicly admitted taking part of a massive science fraud cover-up to bury the evidence that vaccines cause autism.

As usual, the real goal here is to destroy Trump at any cost, all while suppressing the free expression of Americans through coordinated, malicious censorship that amounts to nothing less than an illegal coup against the United States of America.

That’s why the criminal heads of these anti-First Amendment tech giants — like Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg — must be arrested, indicted and charged with treason.

As I explain in the video below, humanity must declare war on Google and the tech giants, or humanity will be forever enslaved and silenced. (By the time the libtard fascist Dems figure this out, they will already be the targets of the very mass executions they are unleashing, just like what happened in the left-wing French Revolution.)

The tech giants are now openly engaged in election rigging

Not only that, Facebook is now threatening to de-platform all channels that mention Trump rallies. As The Gateway Pundit explains, Facebook is now threatening multiple channels after they posted Trump rally descriptions:

On Wednesday night The Gateway Pundit received several warnings from Facebook that we violated community standards and our account is “at risk of being unpublished.”

We were also notified from our readers that anyone who reposted our articles were ALSO THREATENED to be unpublished.

And we are not alone.
On Thursday morning David J Harris Jr. also reported that his Facebook page was being threatened.

David described it as a “modern day lynching.”

It is time for President Trump to declare the tech giants to be engaged in a coordinated, treasonous conspiracy to overthrow the Republic, silence the American people and destroy the very foundation of democracy.

Arrest the tech tyrants now.

The techno-tyrants must be dismantled and shut down. All their top managers and CEOs must be criminally indicted and imprisoned.

If you wish to exercise your free speech, post your videos on Brighteon.com, the pro-liberty YouTube alternative.

Be seeing you

mark of the beast

The Mark of the Beast

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Propaganda and Post-Truth, by Thierry Meyssan

Posted by M. C. on November 7, 2019

https://www.voltairenet.org/article208229.html

by Thierry Meyssan

For 18 years, we have been debating the strange evolution of the media, which seems to place less and less value on facts. We attribute this phenomenon to their democratization through social networks. It would be because from now on any person can become a journalist, that the quality of information would have collapsed. The right to speak should therefore be reserved for the elites.
What if it’s exactly the opposite? If the censorship we are considering was not the answer to the phenomenon, but its continuity?

Propaganda

In political systems where Power needs the participation of the People, the purpose of propaganda is to get as many people as possible to adhere to a particular ideology and to mobilize them to apply it.

The methods used to convince are the same whether one is acting in good or bad faith. However, in the 20th century, the use of lies and repetition, the elimination of different points of view, and recruitment into mass organizations were first theorized by British MP Charles Masterman, US journalist George Creel and especially German minister Joseph Goebbels with the devastating consequences that we know [1]. This is why, at the end of the two World Wars, the United Nations General Assembly adopted three resolutions condemning the use of deliberate lies in the media to provoke war and enjoining Member States to ensure the free flow of ideas, the only prevention of intoxication [2].

While propaganda techniques have been perfected over the past 75 years and are systematically used in all international conflicts, they are gradually giving way to new techniques of influence in countries at peace: it is no longer a question of making the public adhere to an ideology and act in the service of power, but on the contrary of dissuading it from intervening, paralysing it…

Post-truth

Let us take the example of the recent execution of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. We all know that a helicopter squad cannot fly low across northern Syria without being seen by the population or spotted by Russian air defence systems. The narrative that is told to us is clearly impossible. However, far from questioning what we consider propaganda, we are discussing whether the Caliph, cornered by the US Special Forces, blew himself up with two or three children.

At other times, we would have agreed that an essential element of this story being impossible, we cannot take seriously the other elements that are before us, starting with the death of the Caliph. Now we think otherwise. We accept that this factual element has been falsified, a priori for reasons of national security, and we consider the rest of the narrative as authentic. In the long run, we will forget our concern with this or other elements and publish encyclopedias that will tell this beautiful story with its most unlikely elements.

In other words, we instinctively understand that this narrative does not tell facts, but conveys a message. We are therefore not positioning ourselves in the face of the facts, but in the face of the message as we have understood it: as Osama bin Laden, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was executed; Power remains in the United States of America…

Antidote

For the past 18 years, we have been told that by offering everyone the ability to express themselves on a blog or social networks, technological progress has devalued public speech. Anyone can say anything. In the past, only politicians and professional journalists had the opportunity to express themselves. They ensured the quality of their interventions and writings. Today the vulgum pecus, the ignorant crowd, takes bladders for lanterns and spreads fake news.

However, it is exactly the opposite. Leading politicians, starting with President George Bush Jr. and Prime Minister Tony Blair, have assumed inconsistent speeches to inhibit the reactions of the public in general and their constituents in particular. This technique substitutes absurdity for truth as others substituted lies. It has destroyed the functioning of the democratic systems that ordinary people are trying to restore with their means.

CRT televisions display 625-line images. It suffices that one of them be blurred for us to perceive so it alone in the image. On the same principle, it is enough to hear a single different point of view for the lies of omnipresent propaganda to be obvious. That is why propaganda, when it lies, requires relentless censorship. But if the lie introduces an inconsistency into the discourse so that this inconsistency becomes voluntarily obvious, alternative points of view should no longer be censored. On the contrary, we must let them express themselves and highlight them by publicly denouncing some of them as fake news.

The antidote to post-truth is not the verification of facts, this has always been the basis of the work of journalists and historians, it is the restoration of logic. This is why a new form of censorship is needed today. Most Facebook users have been logged out at one time or another. In countless cases, users are unable to understand why they have been censored. They search in vain for which prohibited word would have been detected by a computer, or which uncivil position would have been prohibited by a supervisor. In reality, what they are often accused of and arbitrarily sanctioned for is restoring logic to their reasoning.

 

Translation
Roger Lagassé

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Bombs Away | Lorissa Rinehart

Posted by M. C. on October 29, 2019

https://thebaffler.com/latest/bombs-away-rinehart

Lorissa Rinehart

Most of the world celebrated when the Berlin Wall fell and nuclear holocaust ceased to feel like it was just around the corner. But for the arms industry, the end of the Cold War meant catastrophe, shrinking their market by more than 50 percent in the following years. Those companies that didn’t fold entirely attempted to restructure mid-fall by diversifying their product output while implementing huge layoffs. Survival became Darwinian: adapt or die.

Part of adapting meant changing the way arms manufacturers reached potential clients, since they could no longer rely on the United States or the USSR to serve as an all-in-one PR firm, sales team, and procurement officer as they did when Cold War proxies were buying weapons by the boatload. Instead, companies like Boeing began contracting advertising firms to help increase their existing market shares while penetrating new ones. Starting in the late 1970s, the ads they produced began appearing in military journals that were produced largely in the Western world and distributed in developing nations, where there was room for growth, a practice that only increased into the 1990s. The U.S. government also began to lend a helping hand: in 1996, the Pentagon provided almost $380 million in marketing assistance to U.S. weapons-exporting firms…

As the world settled into its new, post–Cold War order, mergers, closures, and layoffs in the weapons industry accelerated. History was ending, and the future looked bleak—for arms dealers, anyway. Then, two essential paradigms shifted.

The first occurred with the September 11, 2001 attacks. The aftermath, of course, led to an exponential increase in arms sales not only to the United States and Russia, but also to secondary players, many of which are in the Middle East. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia steadily increased from $3 million in 2000 to $3.5 billion in 2018. Though a much smaller number, the United States increased its sales to Morocco from a total of $4 million in 2000 versus a 2018 total of $333 million. Independent studies produced by the Congressional Research Service and the Cato Institute report similar trends throughout the Middle Eastern region.

The second shift remains largely unexamined, unquantified, and unqualified. Yet it constitutes a sea change in the methods and strategies employed in advertising conventional weapons. Quite simply, the launch of Facebook in 2004 and the universe of social media that followed revolutionized the way the arms trade is able to target, reach, and appeal to potential buyers.

Despite this glaring omission in analyses from both academia and the mainstream news,  the importance of social media as a plank in the weapons industry’s marketing platform is evident from the prodigious and extensive output of nearly every major manufacturer across multiple platforms.  One need only tune into Lockheed Martin’s YouTube Channel for corroboration. One of the company’s most recent videos, published on September 16, typifies their marketing strategy on the platform. Backdropped by a blue sky, a low angle image of a Warrior Armored Fighting Vehicle—in other words, a British tank—is interrupted by the kind of pixelated distortion familiar to video games, suggesting a resetting, the introduction of something new, as well as danger ahead.

The camera snaps back to three tanks kicking up dust beneath their tracks while a title card identifies them as being equipped with the “Warrior Capability Sustainment Programme (WCSP)” that upgrades rather than replaces existing armored vehicles. A score fades in with a looped baseline and progressive harmony that simultaneously suggests urgency and hope as the tanks fill the screen with steel and firepower. A cannon fires into a virginal landscape to demonstrate the product’s “Enhanced Lethality.” There are slo-mo shots that look modeled after the juicer moments in action movies, when higher frame rates allow viewers to savor the destruction being wrought on screen. Borrowing from video games, Hollywood, and the daydreams of would-be generals, Lockheed’s WCSP promotional video accomplishes what any good advertisement sets out to do: it establishes its product as cutting edge and cost effective, absolutely necessary and certifiably sexy. This strategy and aesthetic is replicated across multiple videos including those for their Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), F-35 Fighter Jets, and fleet of unmanned aerial vehicles.

Northrop Grumman also has an active YouTube channel replete with high production value content, including a video for its OmegA Heavy Lift Rocket that looks more like a trailer for a patriotic space movie than an ad for a military payload delivery system. But none match the cinematic sophistication of Raytheon, with videos that seem to be taken right out of the Mission: Impossible franchise. A recent production for their Special Mission Aircraft, which “offers several modes of intelligence collection and analysis,” dispenses with the overwrought soundtrack featured by Northrop and the soon-to-be dated special effects in many of Lockheed’s videos. Instead, this short film, as well as many others on Raytheon’s channel, features clean visuals, highly legible text, and upbeat modular music; banners advertising the craft’s specs are punctuated by the telemetry sound effect that often accompanies urgent dispatches from headquarters in a spy film…

Highly produced promotional videos are only one aspect of the arms industry’s social media presence. More personal and “approachable” content can be found on Facebook, where Boeing’s page recently highlighted the Blue Angels, the Navy’s demonstration squadron of fighter jet pilots. Since 1986, the Blue Angels have flown the Boeing F/A-18 Hornet; conveniently, then, the Angels serve not only as entertainment at patriotic airshows, but also as de facto, and rather attractive, spokespeople for the manufacturer of their aircrafts.

But Facebook seems to be most effective for these companies when integrated with industry trade expositions targeted toward government weapons procurement officers and agencies. General Dynamics Mission Systems ramped up their posting during the 2019 Advanced Naval Technology Exercise (ANTX), a multi-day demonstration of new technologies with Naval implications. Specifically, the company used Facebook to promote their Bluefin-9, an unmanned underwater vehicle. This video of a General Dynamic’s salesperson posted during the expo, serves as an infotisement that includes technological specifications as well as potential military applications; its length and content suggest it was intended to serve both as an enticement to attract potential buyers to General Dynamic’s expo booth as well as a resource for procurement officers when presenting their findings to superiors back in the office.

Likewise, the UK’s largest weapons manufacturer, the ironically acronymed BAE Systems, took to Facebook regularly during the 2019 Defence and Security Equipment International conference, making a concerted push for their Light Attack Aircraft System (LAAS), a plug-and-play technology suite designed to interface with a variety of military aircrafts. One infographic posted during the event sets an LAAS equipped plane against a mountainous landscape backlit by a sherbet orange sunrise. Encircling it are a veritable halo of graphics and descriptions detailing its laser-guided rockets, mission computers, missile-warning systems, along with other high-tech features. The advertisement makes an appeal to those in the market for an affordable option that doesn’t sacrifice lethality. As Dave Harrold, BAE’s senior director of business development commented in a National Defense Magazine interview during DSEI, LAAS “can be much more efficient and cost effective. Not everybody can afford an F-35.”

Finally, there is the most rapid, least formal social media platform: Twitter, where users go to get quick hits of dopamine or to prove their pithy yet insightful points IN ALL CAPS once and for ALL. Here, the arms industry’s major players take full advantage of the virtual conveyor belt of infotainment. Posting up to fifteen times a day, Raytheon is perhaps the most prolific tweeter among weapons manufacturers. Aggressive tweets about neutralizing hostile drone swarms and innovative guided missile systems are counterbalanced with those promulgating an inclusive corporate culture, to project a holistic brand image and appease consumers who prefer their deadly war machines built in a welcoming and diverse environment…

To put it succinctly, conventional weapons are presented on social media as if they were any other consumer product. The result is an uncanny collage alternatively composed of banal, benign, and ultraviolet content that visually analogizes advertisements for tanks, fighter jets, and laser-guided bombs with those for cars, travel deals, and cleaning products. This leveling was warned of by the authors of a 1980 study on arms advertising—“If there is any use value of weapons at all it is the destruction of human life,” they wrote, “therefore, a line should be drawn between arms advertisements and all other forms of sales promotion”—and it has only become more pronounced in the intervening decades. It’s hard to know what its ultimate effect will be, but if nothing else, it creates a virtual reality in which ever more lethal weapons are accepted and a state of perpetual war is taken as a given. And, as is increasingly the case, what is true on social media transposes itself onto the real world, where the sale of conventional weapons is still steadily on the rise.

Be seeing you

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »