Net neutrality advocates have it backwards.
Major Silicon Valley companies and their supporters are outraged that the FCC is poised to repeal the Obama administration’s so-called net neutrality regulations—but if anyone should be subject to regulation in the name of preserving a free Internet, it’s them. As FCC chairman Ajit Pai put it, Silicon Valley social-media giants like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube “are a much bigger actual threat to an open Internet than broadband providers, especially when it comes to discrimination on the basis of viewpoint.”
In the report, placing the word “refugees” in quotation marks, as well as “unaccompanied children,” is supposedly an expression of “hate”. (Many, if not most, migrants classified as “unaccompanied children” have turned out to be grown men).
In an extensive survey on the future of technology, Demos asked their 2,003 respondents how long of a delay – if any -they would be prepared to put up with between pressing “send” and their post appearing online if it meant technology companies such as Twitter and Facebook were able to better police the content uploaded to their sites.
A top US regulator, defending an effort to roll back so-called “net neutrality” rules, said Tuesday that large internet platforms represent the biggest threat to online freedom because they routinely block “content they don’t like.”
Here’s a law of politics that is about as cast-iron as a law of politics can be: people who hate tabloid newspapers are snobs. Every time. Scratch a Daily Mail basher or those people who seethe daily about the Sun and you will find someone who’s really just scared of the throng and of what all this tabloid fare is doing to their brains.
Google is to “derank” stories from Kremlin-owned publications Russia Today (RT) and Sputnik in response to allegations about election meddling by President Putin’s government.
Alphabet chairman Eric Schmidt said the search giant needed to deal with the spread of misinformation.
RT has been described by US intelligence agencies as “Russia’s state-run propaganda machine”.
The publications said the move was a form of censorship.
And we’re expected to trust Google?
And with the door now open for “extremist content” to be removed with little or no transparency, YouTube should consider amending its claim as a platform “for expression.” Perhaps re-labeling the services as a platform “for politically correct expression” would be more accurate.
Make no mistake – what has started with RT won’t end with RT. Our betters have decided they need to protect our minds from “propaganda” penetration that might cause us to doubt the truth of what CNN and the Washington Post tell us.
Evergreen State College is now firmly embedded in people’s minds. Why? Because the crybully students there were so incensed at a professor’s opinion that they had to shut down classes. The incident is a prime example of what the alt-left would make the entire United States look like if given the opportunity.
The Southern Poverty Law Center’s rankings of purported hate groups, such as the Alliance Defending Freedom and Family Research Council, are not especially popular among conservatives.
One notable exception: New York University’s College Republicans chapter.
The group disinvited James Merse, a columnist for The Daily Caller and self-described “LGBT Conservative,” based on his association with an organization that SPLC classifies as spreading hate.
It’s true. I just searched the Star-Tribune website for Mahad Abdirahman. Nothing. Why not? Because Job One for the Star-Tribune, and the establishment media in general, is to make sure that no one has a negative view of Islam. Related to this is the media mission to make sure that no one thinks ill of Muslim migrants. Among those migrants, however, will inevitably be an unknowable number of jihad terrorists. So the Star-Tribune is contributing to ignorance and complacency about an issue that people need to know about, and is enabling more jihad activity.
Jackie Charley said she “couldn’t stop laughing” at the bizarre censorship.
Stanford student Andrew Quirk disguises his fascism as a concern for the safety of Muslims, who are, in reality, not in the least endangered by the prospect of my presence, or by my talk, or by the aftermath of my event. But I will, because of the reckless defamation of Andrew Quirk and other Stanford fascists, be coming to Stanford with a security team.
The lawsuit was filed after members of the school’s Turning Point USA chapter were told by police officers that they could not advocate for fossil fuels on campus without obtaining advance permission from administrators.