So there is an alarming trend that seems to increasingly be revealing itself…that of numerous platforms attempting to silence & censor conservative voices online & elsewhere. Way back in the early days of so-called “hate speech” restrictions the trend to violate Free Speech was becoming “politically correct” (aka morally bankrupt) at least in the enforcement of speech codes against one side of the political spectrum. I’m not a journalist or a professional researcher so this post is not an attempt to argue my point by building a methodical case, rather this will just contain some material that is coming readily to hand by way of some online material.
First up is an insightful account by an individual who recently found their Free Speech under assault by YouTube. The original article & source of the following quotes is here:
“YouTube’s policy of suppressing conservative broadcasters…hit close to home early last Tuesday morning when a video I was on was suddenly taken down. It was there one minute, with 10,000 views and that number climbing rapidly, and then it just disappeared…In a long career of writing and commenting, I had never encountered anything like it.”
The author recounts his experience as a contributor to an online production called The Hagmann Report. Content regularly gets 100,000 views according to the author. I used to read columns by Doug Hagmann at CanadaFreePress.com and found his writing compelling, well-sourced, & daring–going places many others refused to or dare not go. Here are links to some of his & his associates archives there:
Here are a couple of other archives that might be of interest:
OK, so I got pretty distracted perusing CFP’s archives & have read much of what the people &/or organizations have put out over the years…there is much to glean for anyone so inclined to dig deeper…back to the original AT article now…
“Every Monday, I contribute a one hour political analysis by video Skype to The Hagmann Report (HR). HR is a 3-hour nightly conservative television and radio program that streams live on a variety of mainline audio sites and, until last Monday, on its most prominent platform, YouTube in HD.”
“The Hagmanns are Christians, as are many of their guests, so as usual there was nothing excessively controversial about it – no bad language, no personal attacks, no copyright infringements, no incitements to violence. Just hard hitting political analysis.”
Basically the author is arguing that there is no obvious offensive or prohibited content, just an “undesired” conservative message based on the extreme leftward bias of YouTube’s owner’s at Google…
“Even though the action wasn’t aimed specifically at me by name, I wondered if I was now going to be caught up in a YouTube or social media censorship ban and put on some algorithm blacklist. It was eerie and unsettling and more than a little scary. It had an epic, turning point feeling to it. At that moment, all I could think of was that George Orwell’s prophetic 1949 dystopian novel 1984 had now come fully to life.
And that wasn’t all. Monday’s Hagmann Report video had obviously been taken down as the result of a third party (i.e., troll) complaint, or possibly by something that went on during the show triggering a mysterious YouTube algorithm alarm. Or possibly as a result of nothing at all except the increasing need on the part of the Internet giants to avoid the mistakes they think they made in 2016 that resulted in the unexpected victory of Donald J. Trump, whom all of them opposed in his run against Hillary Clinton. Mistakes including allowing conservatives to have a fair shot at communicating their messages unfiltered with the American people.”
“In “A Snapshot of the Internet Kill Switch in 2018,” published August 18 in Waking Times, staff writer Terence Newton puts the “community standards” excuse at number one on his list of methods being used by Big Tech to suppress conservative voices online.
1.) “Violation of Community Guidelines” (The Outright Ban) – First and foremost is the now ubiquitous, blanket statement that users of corporate media platforms get when their pages, channels, accounts are shut down. It never points to anything specific, or offers an opportunity to right the transgression. It is legalese for ‘f$#k off, you’re not wanted around here.”
What the Hagmanns and many other conservatives are being subjected to is Kafkaesque. The defendant, in this case a conservative YouTube user who uploads content, is anonymously accused – possibly by a bot running an algorithm – found guilty, and sentenced in a matter of a few hours. There is zero transparency. Not only is there no appeal, but also no explanation of what the alleged infraction even was. A defense is not possible! It’s like a secret star chamber form of in-justice.”
“But having been subjected to a first strike, as a content provider myself I am seeing how one cannot help but start to self-censor content – since even the appearance of a politically incorrect or insensitive wrong move of some kind, no matter how minor, might lead to a second strike. And then there would be no buffer between that second strike and third strike oblivion.”
“According to an article on August 24 at Breitbart, Robert Epstein cited a chilling result from one of the recent studies he conducted:
I calculate that these [tech] companies will be able to shift upwards of 12 million votes in November with no one knowing that they’re doing so … and without leaving a paper trail for authorities to trace. “
After his chilling first hand account of internet censorship the author directs his readers to further writings that I’ll explore next.
The next set of quotes come from this article:
This article actually expounds on the David Brock document that puts in place a 2 year plan to return power to Democrats. Here is the document:
I actually had a previous post dedicated to some analysis of the above doc here:
“In January 2017 after Hillary Clinton was shellacked in the November 2016 election top Democrat operatives at Media Matters, Share Blue, American Bridge, and CREW came together and released their two-year plan to take back power in Washington DC.”
The David Brock plan included reducing/eliminating conservative voices online…
“In 2016 The Gateway Pundit was one of the few conservative sites that supported candidate Trump – along with Breitbart, The Drudge Report, Infowars, Zero Hedge, Conservative Treehouse and several others.
In 2017 Harvard and Columbia Journalism Review found that The Gateway Pundit was the 4th most influential conservative news source in the 2016 election.
Because of this we were targeted and have seen our numbers related to Facebook and Twitter decline dramatically.
This had nothing to do with the quality of our posts as we have proof that our generic numbers are up and and continue to increase…
Facebook took our money for advertising and promised a fair playing field. Facebook lied to us and every conservative group in America. And, according to far left groups, Facebook is working with liberal organizations to eliminate conservative content.
A recent Pew Study found that 71% of Americans see how tech giants are censoring political content.
And they are.
A Gateway Pundit June study of top conservative news outlets found that Facebook has eliminated 93% of traffic to top conservative websites.”
Full results of their study can be found here:
The next suggested read is also linked to from the original AT article & found here:
The WND article also analyzed the David Brock “memo” & plan of censorship. It documents how Nazi collaborator George Soros is behind much of this activity. It also shared these aspects of supportive evidence for what is currently taking place.
“President Trump’s 2020 campaign manager, Brad Parscale, charged last week the giants of Silicon Valley are stifling free speech, particularly conservative speech, manifesting the “inherent totalitarian impulse” of the left.
On Friday, Facebook appeared to be “shadow banning” the non-profit education site PragerU, founded by talk-host Dennis Prager, causing a drop in engagement of 99.9999 percent while removing two videos regarded as “hate speech.”
After Facebook rejected a highly inspirational ad for a Republican congressional candidate that included images depicting her parents’ persecution under the Khmer Rouge communist regime in Cambodia, Twitter followed up with its own ban.
WND reported earlier this month Facebook banned a pro-life video ad by a judicial candidate, giving the same explanation.
On Aug. 6, WND reported, Facebook, YouTube and Apple banned commentator Alex Jones and his Infowars website within hours of each other.
Last month, WND reported moderate Muslims and counter-terrorist activists were increasingly being restricted by Silicon Valley, while terrorist content remains on social-media platforms, according to researchers.
Trump campaign chief Parscale said last week the banning of Jones “will inevitably lead to the silencing of those with far less controversial opinions.”“
Needless to say this totalitarian silencing of alternative & dissenting voices is increasingly alarming. It’s happening now & likely to continue as we approach the mid-term elections as the Left desperately seeks to wrest power from regular Americans & those who appreciate the massive positive national & international changes being wrought by our diligent Pro-American President Donald J. Trump…