Social media is engaging in unprecedented censorship when it comes to the American experience. Twitter is changing its rules to punish and ban anyone for not just what they publish on Twitter, but for what they say ANYWHERE. Within 90 days social media sites will be monitoring their users for their statements they make and the websites that they visit. To obtai that kind of information, the NSA would have to be involved and they are.
On an interview on last week’s The Common Sense Show, Pat Wood described a Chinese woman who made critical comments of the government. She was visited by the men-in-black and when they did not arrest her, she thought she was ok. However, the following week, the woman received an expulsion letter from her university. This was followed by her employment being terminate and this nightmare culminated with her eviction from state-owned housing. China controls Internet users through a point system and this woman lost all of her points for her post. This system was designed by Google. And it is coming here.
Social Media Sites and the Independent Media
Social media sites, that the Independent Media (IM) uses to disseminate information, are cracking down on conservative, Christian viewpoints. At one time, the social media giants allowed the IM to use their sites without much interference because they could monitor public opinion and measure and calculate resistance to globalist programs. However, they miscalculated because they did not believe that the IM could have any real impact. Not only is the IM shaping public opinion, we got Donald Trump elected. Enough is enough, never again, the social media tyrants, controlled by allies of the Deep State and the New World Order, have decided to eliminate all electronic free speech that is not leftist, authoritarian, socialist and yes, Satanic!
Definition of Terms
Before launching into the critical topics associated with this article, it is necessary to define some of the more pertinent “communication” terms.
On Platform– Whereby users of social media actively participating on a social media site
Off Platform– Whereby users of social media are publicly proclaiming a view point outside of a specific social media platform. For example, if you were to express an opinion in an op-ed in a local newspaper, and not on a specific social media platform, that would be considered to be off platform. If one posted a video on Facebook, Twitter would consider the video to be off platform, Facebook would consider it to be on platform.
Hate Speech– Any speech that disagrees with the views prevailing leftist, socialist, and dictatorship-orientated style of government (eg right to life, one man-one vote).
Twittter’s View of Free Speech
We believe in freedom of expression and open dialogue, but that means little as an underlying philosophy if voices are silenced because people are afraid to speak up. In order to ensure that people feel safe expressing diverse opinions and beliefs, we prohibit behavior that crosses the line into abuse, including behavior that harasses, intimidates, or uses fear to silence another user’s voice.
Context matters when evaluating for abusive behavior and determining appropriate enforcement actions. Factors we may take into consideration include, but are not limited to whether:
- The behavior is targeted at an individual or group of people;
- The report has been filed by the target of the abuse or a bystander;
- The behavior is newsworthy and in the legitimate public interest.
When Twitter says one cannot target an individual or group of people, they are basically saying that as of December 18. 2017, one may not call out George Soros for his groups (ie Antifa) for organizing the deadly riots at Charlottesville or Black Lives Matter may be criticzed for their violent anti-Trump rallies
Please note that the abovementioned Twitter standards call legitimate criticsm, “abuse “. Further, if one found the need to criticize George Soros, he is already protected, because he is being abused. Further, a criticized person can assume a “victims position” to avoid any legitmate criticsm. Meanwhile, CNN’s Anderson Cooper and Wolf Blitzer can Tweet out the notion that Trump is a racist and even make fun of the way that he consumes water during a recent speech.
Finally, please note that Twitter reserves the right to determine what is newsworthy and if it is “in the legitimate public interest”. Therefore, if I want to criticize Hillary Clinton for her treasonous act of selling nuclear grade material to the Russians, she, or her designee, can claim abuse, even if it is true.
Twitter Can Determine Your Friendships and Organizations That You Identify With
Twitter goes on to state:
- …You also may not affiliate with organizations that — whether by their own statements or activity both on and off the platform — use or promote violence against civilians to further their causes. We will begin enforcing this rule around affiliation with such organizations on December 18, 2017.
Are you rubbing your eyes, yet, in total amazement? Twitter is assuming the right to control what you do and what you say AWAY from Twitter. In fact, ALL social media is going to be controlling your “off-platform behaviors”.
All Social Media Is Being Used to Control Thoughts, Actions and Speech
I have learned that Facebook and Youtube are preparing to enact the EXACT same guidelines. YouTube’s new program where kids as young as 13 will decide what you will see and hear. It’s called the Heroes program. If 3 strikes are delivered against your Youtube Channel, because a 13 year old does not like the content, your account is deleted and on the 3rd strike there is no appeal process. Facebook is “willy, nilly” on their censorship as it is so random and inconsistent the users cannot know when they are “violating” the precious community standards.
The Common Sense Show Experience- “Not Advertiser Friendly”
I have had scores of videos demonetized by YouTube because they are “not advertiser friendly”. Not advertiser friendly? I had a video demonetized that had 1,735 likes and 21 dislikes, with over 140,000 views and I did not make a dime on the video. Why? Because I referred to a current event that involved a suspicious death of a political figure. My approval rating for this video had an approval rating of over 98% and it is not advertiser-friendly? With 98% of the people approving of the video, the video was very advertiser-friendly and would make the audience of The Common Sense Show MUCH more receptive to being advertising friendly. The term advertiser friendly is a Bravo-Sierra term. What they mean is that I am not loony-liberal-left anti-Christian friendly and my conservative views should not be heard. The First Amendment violators and the thought police are patrolling the corridors of the social media giants with the message “You either promote our world-view or will make you deliver your message at a financial loss.”
There is no such thing as advertiser friendly. The whores from Wall Street don’t care where they peddle their goods and services. Just ask Prescott Bush (HW Bush’s father) when tried to get away with doing business with the Nazis during WW II.
One other item that Youube users are already aware of needs to be brought to light. I post 8-10 news items per day on Youtube. About 50% of them are instantly demonitized. Then I file an electronic appeal and Youtube, on average a full five days later grants my appeal. However, after five days, the audience has moved on to more topical videos and I make almost no money. Google has to employ this strategy on Youtube because they are, as I have said, an unregulated monopoly and as such they cannot blatantly censor the points of view that they are opposed to. They are trying to drive the IM out of business. However, this Youtube strategy is only a stop gap measure. They are now deleting accounts that “violate community standards”, whatever that means as there is no obnjective criteria.
Hate Speech and Extremism
Any view which is anti-New World Order which advocates for the for total obliteration of freedom, both politically and financially, is labeled as hate speech. If we advocate for screening immigrants criminal background is hate speech as if no terrorist with bad intentions would ever try and cross our border in order to do Americans harm.
If one speaks against the illegal and unethical actions of Wall Street, that is considered “extremism”. I have been demonetized and suspended from Facebook for discussing child-sex-trafficking. The FBI and every major police department in the country have task forces related to this topic, but if I write about it, even just to report a related news event, my work is banned and/or demonetized.
Please consider the following admonition from YouTube:
“Controversial or sensitive subjects and events, including subjects related to war, political conflicts, natural disasters and tragedies, even if graphic imagery is not shown.”
Don’t the topics which includes content of controversial, sensitive issues, wars, political conflicts, natural disasters and tragedies make up 95% of the content on your nightly news?
Rules for Thee but Not for Me
Countless times, I have seen a CNN or Fox News video reproduced, with YouTube ads being played on YouTube without restriction. Ads from Wall Street advertisers play unabated and permeate these MSM sites and we in the alt media are not allowed to cover these same topics. If I address the topic (eg war, right vs. left politics), I am banned or demonetized. YouTube and Facebook are guilty of extremism. Extreme hypocritical treatment of divergent and legitimate political views is a repressible rehash of Stalin and Hitler (oh, the use of these historical figures names will get banned as well).
For the record, The Common Sense Show does not advocate for violence except in extreme self- defense. The show argues against the use of violence by our government in their wars of occupation which are nothing more that resource-grabbing adventures on behalf of the globalists. Yet CNN videos play on YouTube unabated which stand in support with the never-ending wars.
By the way, there is no appeal to the arbitrary decisions of censorship as the new algorithms are key word driven and they have no real appeal mechanism. Do you think CNN and Fox are ever demonetized or banned for covering news stories that are underwritten and funded by CIA? Former reporter, Amber Lyons, claimed was true?
Consider the following graphic appearing on Alex Jones’ Infowars website. This says it all. This has already happened to Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, where Google delisted Mike’s publications.
Facebook banned Mark Dice. Was his content to funny or to TRUE?
Course of Action
The IM should ban together and sue the Washington Post for accusing us of being Russian agents for supporting Donald Trump. We should look into suing Facebook and YouTube. Oh, I know they are private entities. However, they are unregulated monopolies that are predatory in nature. I have had some private conversations with sympathetic attorneys that think that these social media giants may have crossed the line with regard to anti-trust violations.
If the estimated 20-30 million people who frequent IM sites would contribute 5 dollars each to a trust fund, we could make this brand of communist censorship very expensive to YouTube (Google) and Facebook.
If everyone refused to use Google’s search engine, it would cost them billions. If we began to boycott advertisers who are contributing to the demise of the Independent Media, feel the pinch, we would quickly see how broad the term “not advertiser friendly” would become.
If our followers were crowdfunding their favorites shows, websites and YouTube creators, the message would still be heard.
Here is the stark reality of where this is headed
The IM in a dying gasp to stay viable, will attempt to get their followers to, in some measure, pay for their favorite entities to stay in business. However, I am not confident in the alt right crowd’s determination to do such a thing on a scale that will make any real difference.
Before the IM largely goes extinct, you will see the following:
- Websites will ban users who employ adblockers to access their site
- Radio shows will charge a small premium (5-10 dollars per month to access).
- YouTubers will be forced to watch private ads secured by the creators and played in front of their video.
I have experimented with the third option. Here were the results: I added almost 11,000 subscribers over the past 90 days. However, 2,000+ YouTubers unsubscribed because they did not think I should show any private ads. In other words, a fair amount of the public expects to continue to receive something for nothing. This ads to the problem.
Twitter, YouTube (i.e. Google) and Facebook are acting as unregulated monopolies. They provide a privately owned platform in which the Independent Media provides a conservative interpretation of the news as opposed to the radical left-wing Mainstream media who espouses such values as expressing anti-Christian views, advocating for the continual erosion of the Bill of Rights and the rest of the Constitution, completely open borders in which anyone with two legs and carrying weapons of mass destruction can illegally cross our borders take up residence, all courtesy of the US taxpayer. And according to Facebook and YouTube they have the right to ban you from using their platform for espousing traditional American values that our country was founded on.
The major takeway from this article should be the old saying “where they burn books, they will soon burn people”. It is coming and much sooner than most people realize.