Category: social media

Categories
First Amendment rights Internet controversy social media

Will Elon Liberate Tweeting?

Elon Musk

Persons who skip social media or who spend their time on Twitter and Facebook discussing lunch or the weather may not realize how anti-speech such big-tech forums have become.

If you disagree about what’s better for breakfast, eggs or oatmeal, no problem.

But despite their putative pretense of providing open forums, the dominant social-media companies routinely ban discussion of touchy subjects like Hunter Biden laptops, pandemics, and and the politics of race and gender. As the satire site Babylon Bee discovered, even calling a man a man, apparently quite a controversial observation, can get you in hot water with Twitter censors.

We have ways of combatting the censorship. One is using alternative platforms that do regard open discussion as a value. Another is becoming a major stockholder and disrupting the anti-speech agenda from within.

Is this what Elon Musk is up to? Bee CEO Seth Dillon says that after Twitter suspended Babylon Bee for calling a man a man, Musk called him about the suspension and said that “he might need to buy Twitter.” 

Presumably in order to put a stop to such censorious shenanigans.

Now Elon Musk, who has 80.6 million followers on Twitter, has bought the company. Or rather, he has acquired a big stake in it, a 9.2 percent stake. This apparently makes him Twitter’s largest stockholder. Maybe we can dare to hope that he will eventually become the majority stockholder.

Good first step, Mr. Musk. 

Next? Get Twitter to remove the gags.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
Internet controversy social media

We Hear a Rumble

Rumble, Dan Bongino

Build it and they will come. 

What’s the “it”?

Rumble.

And who’s the “they”? 

The superstars censored by YouTube.

Not just superstars and the censored, of course. Plenty of producers and viewers are migrating to Rumble simply because they’re sick of seeing discussion squelched on dogma-guarding platforms like Google’s YouTube.

But it sure is a boost for Rumble and the cause of open discussion on the interwebs when Dan Bongino, who had about 900,000 subscribers on YouTube when it booted him, has two million subscribers and counting on Rumble.

House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy joined Rumble late last year and in just a few months has acquired over 53,000 subscribers. Not Bongino level, but not bad.

Among others joining Rumble recently are Bitcoin Magazine, the financial news channel Benzinga, and Reason magazine.

Fast-growing Rumble boasts of an “independent infrastructure designed to be immune to cancel culture” and a mission “to restore the Internet to its roots by making it free and open once again.”

That’s the opposite attitude and ambition of the big-tech hall monitors, constantly thumping their chests about how efficiently they’re censoring “misinformation.” (Good thing these people aren’t in charge of water-cooler chit-chat.)

The growing success of Rumble and other alternatives shows we’re not forever stuck with Google, Twitter, Facebook, et al. even if we’re stuck with their censorship.

This is Common Sense. I’m —

Oops. Almost forgot to mention that This Week in Common Sense is on Rumble too. Drop by, sign up, and chat with us in the comments. We’ll even let you disagree.

— Paul Jacob.

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
First Amendment rights social media

Chirp Meets Buzz

twitter, Babylon Bee, censorship

The Babylon Bee won’t cooperate with Twitter’s censorship of the Babylon Bee.

When instructed to remove tweets in order to recover account access, people tend to comply.

Not always, but often.

Hard to blame them. But it does mean that Twitter gets away with all kinds of egregious censorship that the social media “platform” shouldn’t get away with.

The Bee’s latest sin? Bestowing upon HHS Assistant Secretary for Health Rachel Levine — who had just been dubbed a Woman of the Year by USA Today because Levine “identifies as” a woman — the title Man of the Year.

Twitter has locked the Babylon Bee out of its Twitter account.The platform literally “can’t take a joke.” And Twitter demands the Bee must delete the tweet to regain access.

“We’re not deleting anything,” says Bee CEO Seth Dillon. “If the cost of telling the truth is the loss of our Twitter account, then so be it.”

Dillon notes that account holders are not only expected to remove offending tweets but also to repentantly check a box to renounce the censored viewpoint. “You have to deny that you meant it. . . . They’re forcing you to grovel and adopt an ideological position that you don’t actually hold.”

The Babylon Bee is routinely assailed by Internet censors. Satire, parody, pastiche, lampoon, spoof, sarcasm, irony, etc. are all allegedly forms of “misinformation” and “hate speech,” thwarting of which is the rationalization du decade for stopping people from talking to each other.

In response, the Babylon Bee is thankfully taking a stand and, let’s hope and trust, won’t back down.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
international affairs Internet controversy social media

Starlink to Ukraine

Elon Musk, Starlink, Ukraine

Twitter’s policy of spasmodically censoring tweets and banning accounts, often without pausing to ponder what they are doing, has had at least one baleful effect in Ukraine. 

Last Wednesday, Twitter said it had “erred when it deleted about a dozen accounts that were posting information about Russian troop movements.” Obviously, the Russian invaders already know about their own troop movements. Losing this info could only hurt the people in Ukraine trying to defend themselves or run for their lives.

Innocent error? Anyway, Twitter said, in effect, “Our bad” and that it was now “proactively reinstating” affected accounts.

On the plus side, though, Ukraine official Mykhailo Federov was able to use Twitter to ask Elon Musk for help when the Russian assault knocked out the Internet in parts of the country.

“@elonmusk, while you try to colonize Mars,” Federov tweeted, “Russia try to occupy Ukraine! While your rockets successfully land from space — Russian rockets attack Ukrainian civil people! We ask you to provide Ukraine with Starlink stations. . . .”

That’s one way to get around the secretary barrier. And it worked.

“Starlink service is now active in Ukraine. More terminals en route,” was Musk’s tweet-response last Saturday.

Starlink satellites provides Internet access from space. No cables or optic fiber needed. Nothing for saboteurs to snip.

Good thinking, Mr. Federov. Thank you for the unreliably available platform, Twitter. Thank you, Elon Musk, for answering Ukraine’s cry for help and doing so as swiftly as possible.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
Regulating Protest social media

The Hacker Crackdown

trucker, Canada, crowd funding, government

In a nation of laws, not of men — as the old phrase puts it — we may not fight our ideological fights “by any means necessary.” People have rights. Governments and civil opponents have to follow the rules to contest others’ actions.

Yesterday, in “#GoPoundSand,” I re-told the tale of GiveSendGo, the “Christian crowd-funding  site,” and how it stepped up to the plate and took off where GoFundMe failed — and how the Canadian government was still trying to censor its ability to facilitate giving and receiving money online.

No sooner was it up here at ThisIsCommonSense.org and the story ramped up another level. A group of online saboteurs took it offline and redirected site travelers to GiveSendGone.wtf.

Called “hackers” by the major media, that’s not exactly right. But close enough for non-specialists. I’ve been lectured on the difference between hacking and “cracking” and other malicious Internet sabotage by tech-savvy friends in the past. But I’m not the person to engage in pedantry on this subject.

Worse — and more malicious — was the collecting of the names of the donors with an aim to leaking the list. “The unidentified hackers condemned GiveSendGo for allowing users to fundraise legal fees for those involved in the Jan. 6 riots and for platforming the Freedom Convoys,” explains Christopher Hutton at the Washington Examiner, “noting that an Ontario court had frozen the entire endeavor.”

Once upon a time, hacker culture was the realm of “anarchists” and “dissidents” etc. Nowadays? Not so much: this effort was squarely on the side of establishment institutions and narratives.

It is almost as if the “hackers” were paid government agents.

They certainly aren’t pro-protest rebels.

The GiveSendGo site was offline as of the evening of the 14th, when this report was being finalized.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
First Amendment rights general freedom social media

#GoPoundSand

Give Send Go, crowd funding, Canada, truckers, GoFundMe

The exact words of GiveSendGo, on Twitter:

“Know this! Canada has absolutely ZERO jurisdiction over how we manage our funds here at GiveSendGo. All funds for EVERY campaign on GiveSendGo flow directly to the recipients of those campaigns, not least of which is The Freedom Convoy campaign.”

Just the attitude one would hope for.

This wonderful statement is in response to assertions by the government of Ontario that they’re preventing the Freedom Convoy from getting the funds via GiveSendGo that truckers need to eat, gas up after police steal their gas, etc. All the standard expenses involved in being a national (and now international) trucker convey fighting tyranny.

Compare the inspiring policies of the folks at GiveSendGo with the dreary interventionism of the pinch-mouthed overlords at GoFundMe.

In addition to shutting down the Freedom Convoy campaign, GoFundMe briefly but seriously planned to steal some of the donations that had already been made.

GoFundMe has also shut down other fundraising campaigns to oppose mask and vaccine mandates, campaigns to help Kyle Rittenhouse and to help conservative students harassed at Arizona State University, a campaign to investigate voter fraud, etc.

We have to think long and hard. If we need to raise money for a purpose the tyrannical left would disapprove, are we better off going with new-kid-on-the-block GiveSendGo or better-established GoFundMe?

I hope that you ponder this question for the same full millisecond that I did.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
general freedom media and media people social media

Thank You for Not Stealing

gofundme, funding, truckers, Ottawa

GoFundMe has decided not to rob its users after all.

Canadian truckers have been protesting the requirement that truckers be vaccinated against COVID-19 in order to cross the Canadian-U.S. border to deliver stuff. There have been miles-long convoys and so forth. Ottawa has been clogged with trucks.

The Freedom Convoy incurs expenses like gas, food, and lodging. Many people are glad to help because they’re sick to death of pointless, destructive Draconian measures to pseudo-combat the virus.

Organizers naively sought to raise funds for the cause through GoFundMe. Alas, this is one of the left-leaning tech giants that selectively enforce their alleged standards in hopes of thwarting ideological opponents.

After consulting with Concerned Canadian Officials, GoFundMe blocked the donations from reaching the intended beneficiaries.

That’s not all.

Instead of then simply refunding the donations, GoFundMe declared that it would redistribute the cash to GoFundMe-approved organizations unless donors specifically requested a refund. Busy, inattentive people would be robbed.

Outcry ensued. The Florida attorney general, backed by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, proposed to investigate the proposed theft.

GoFundMe caved. We won’t steal the funds after all, they announced (not in quite those words).

So if you tried to support the protest of the Canadian truckers and GoFundMe blocked you from donating, you’ll get your money back without having to make a special appeal for it. And now you can contribute to Freedom Convoy 2022 via GiveSendGo instead. Hurray!

Thank you, GoFundMe. Thank you. So. Much.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
general freedom ideological culture international affairs social media

LinkedIn, Red-Handed

Breitbart, LinkedIn, censorship, China, freedom

How dare they? 

In their eagerness to chastise tyrannical governments and Western lackey tech firms, some persons appear to go so far as to cite — get this — investigative reports.

That’s what one LinkedIn user recently did, anyway. 

So no wonder Microsoft’s LinkedIn felt obliged to censor him for it.

The trouble-making investigative report? Peter Schweizer’s Red-Handed: How American Elites Get Rich Helping China Win. The LinkedIn user in question tried to share a Breitbart piece about the book: “Red-Handed Exposes Communist China’s Silicon Valley Sympathizers.”

In his own remarks, the censored LinkedIn user chimed in with a condemnation of China’s genocidal policies and American Big Tech’s abetting of the Chinese Communist Party.

LinkedIn says the user’s post violated its policies against “bullying.”

This is “not the first time LinkedIn has been caught censoring criticism of Communist China on its platform,” observes Breitbart.com. LinkedIn is now suppressing posts “that expose Big Tech’s own links to the authoritarian regime in China.

“Microsoft, which owns LinkedIn, is exposed in Schweizer’s book for working with the Chinese military on artificial intelligence research.”

I have the answer to this problem.

Before you say something on mainstream social media, ask yourself: “Is the thought I’m about to express something that the Chinazi government would approve? What about LinkedIn and other spineless Chinazi-government-appeasing social-media companies like Twitter, YouTube, Facebook? Would they approve?”

If not, take your heretical thinking to Rumble, Odysee, Teamspeak, Telegram, Gab, MeWe, and/or Clouthub, and express your thoughts there instead. 

I dare you.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
First Amendment rights social media

Google Shareholders vs. Google Censorship

Joe Biden, censorship, big tech

Some Google shareholders are pressing Google for records of its communications with the Biden administration. And not just any old records. They are specifically demanding those pertaining to the administration’s demands for censorship.

Per the First Amendment, it is unconstitutional for government to seek to muzzle people for saying things that government officials disapprove of.

Yet the Biden Administration and others, including members of Congress, have openly (and repeatedly) urged big-tech social media companies to more assiduously censor discussion of COVID-19 policy, COVID-19 vaccines, the nature of COVID-19. The president did this again just last week: “I make a special appeal to social media companies and media outlets — please deal with the misinformation and disinformation that’s on your shows. It has to stop.”

Everything we’ve seen adds up to a slam-dunk case against the government for violating the First Amendment. We know that government officials are asking social-media companies to censor. They’re not hiding it.

Suing the government’s big-tech lackeys — and government officials, when plausible — is one way to combat the evil.

The National Legal and Policy Center, a Google shareholder, is trying to secure a requirement that the company disclose the content of any communications between itself and the government related to the Biden Administrations calls for censorship. Last summer, the administration stated that it was “in regular touch” with the big-tech giants.

Will Google voluntarily produce documents showing that it acquiesced in specific Biden administration demands for censorship?

No. But as Charles Glasser has pointed out, there is precedent for a judicial finding that media are de facto “government agents” when they work “hand-in-hand with government in violating constitutional rights.”

The effort may not succeed, but it’s worth a shot.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
social media

Reversing the Irreversible

Heroes of Liberty, censorship, Facebook

Facebook has reversed its “irreversible” decision to strip Heroes of Liberty, a publisher, of all advertising revenue.

On December 23, Facebook locked the publisher’s ad account because of “low quality or disruptive content.” The ads pitched children’s books about figures like Ronald Reagan, Amy Coney Barrett, and Thomas Sowell.

When Heroes of Liberty appealed, Facebook dug in its heels: “You can no longer advertise with this ad account and its ads and assets will remain disabled. This is our final decision.”

Heroes of Liberty editor Bethany Mandel suspects that a small group of hysterical critics of the Heroes of Liberty series provoked the action.

“These are the same people who riot and take down statues of our founding fathers,” she says. “They want to strip us of our ability to honor our heroes in the digital sphere and in children’s books.”

After sharp public criticism of the action, Facebook restored the account. The scope of the censorship proved a little too embarrassing, for now.

Just a silly little mistake that could happen to any giant high-tech censor?

Well, no. 

One, somebody writes the algorithms.

Two, somebody confirmed the decision to kill a publisher’s advertising account solely because its books have the “wrong” mission.

Fortunately, we are getting more and more alternatives to the high-tech censors . . . and the alternatives we already have are growing fast. The sooner we can make the Facebooks, Googles, and Twitters of the world irrelevant to online success, the better.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts